SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 899

High Court of Judicature at Madras
Case No : W.P. Nos. 20992 & 20993 of 2018 & W.M.P. Nos. 24642 & 24643 of 2018
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM
Parties : Sundaram Medical Foundation, Dr. Rangarajan Memorial Hospital, Represented by T.N.P.Durai, Chennai, Versus Chennai Metro Water Supply & Sewerage Board, Rep. by Area Engineer – VIII, Chennai & Another
Date of Judgment : 26-04-2021

Appearing Advocates:For the Petitioner:Srinath Sridevan, Advocate. For the Respondent: N. Ramesh, Standing counsel, M/s. Karthikaa Ashok, Senior Standing counsel.

Point of Law: Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 defines “Charitable purpose” as includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief, and the advancement of any other object of general public utility

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 - Section 101(e) - Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 - Section 110(e) - Income Tax Act - Sections 2(15) and 202 (1) (b) - Writ of Certiorari - Demand notice - Deed of Trust - Charitable purpose – Tax - Petitioner had written a letter to respondents pointing out it is a Charitable hospital and is to be exempted - Court quashed demand and remanded matter back Regional Deputy Commissioner - Respondents passed a non-speaking order - Declining to grant exemption from payment of property tax - Writ petitioner filed Court passed an directing respondents to re-consider matter on merits - Respondent passed a cryptic order - Matter was again remanded back to Commissioner examine application for exemption and pass appropriate orders - Regional Deputy Commissioner passed another cryptic

Finding of the court: Capable of paying medical charges whole purpose and object of Deed of Trust is to ensure free medical services are provided to poors in general and services also may be provided at concessional rates there is a clear indication medical services is to be provided largely and predominantly to poor, needy and deserving people alone - writ petitioner Foundation is not entitled to get exemption - During inspection, it is found petitioner is providing treatment to rich and affluent, but certainly not at concessional rate

Result: Writ petitions is dismissed

Judgment :-

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of records of the respondent pertaining to the impugned demand notice bearing no. 08/100/04885/000 dated 09.08.2018 as well as the notice of disconnection bearing no.11488 dated 09.08.2018 and quash the same.

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to Order dated 22.06.2018 bearing Z.O.VIII.R.D.C.No./ 1715/ 2018 issued by the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to pass orders of exemption from property tax under Section 101(e) of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 in respect of its premises at Sundaram Medical Foundation, Dr. Rangarajan Memorial Hospital, Shanthi Colony, 4th Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600040.)

Common Order

The writ petitions on hand are filed by Sundaram Medical Foundation, Dr.Rangarajan Memorial Hospital, seeking exemption from payment of property tax under Section 101(e) of the 'Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919' [in short, 'CCMC' Act], in respect of its premises at Shanthi Colony, 4th Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040. The application made by the writ petitioner was rejected in proceedings dated 22.06.2018 and the demand notice in proceedings dated 09.08.2018 are under challenge in the present writ petitions.

2. The facts in nutshell as narrated by the writ petitioner reveals that the petitioner / Sundaram Medical Foundation was created under and by a Deed of Declaration of Trust dated 29.11.1990. On 07.01.1991, the petitioner submitted application to the Government of Tamil Nadu, seeking allotment of lands, for the purpose of setting up of hospital offering free / concessional medical services. Another application was also sent on 29.03.1992. On 10.04.1992, the Government of Tamil Nadu issued G.O.Ms.No.460, Revenue and allotted an extent of 2542 Sq.Mtrs of land at Anna Nagar to the petitioner Medical Foundation for the purpose of setting up a hospital.

3. The petitioner had written a letter to the respondents on 14.12.1994, pointing out that it is a Charitable hospital and is to be exempted under Section 101(e) of the 'CCMC' Act. However, on 28.03.2002 and on 02.07.2005, the petitioner received demand notices from the 2nd respondent. On 27.08.2007, the petitioner preferred an appeal in M.T.A.No.21/2006 before the Learned Principal Judge, City Civil Court, challenging the order dated 19.06.2006 in TAT.No.112 of 2006. The Principal District Court quashed the demand and remanded the matter back to the Regional Deputy Commissioner. In proceedings dated 12.08.2008, the respondents passed a non-speaking order dated 12.08.2008, declining to grant exemption from payment of property tax. The writ petitioner filed W.P.No.21084 of 2008 and this Court passed an order on 28.08.2008, directing the respondents to re-consider the matter on merits. Once again, the respondent passed a cryptic order, refusing to grant exemption from payment of property tax in proceedings dated 27.01.2009. Again the writ petitioner filed W.P.No.2383 of 2009 and the said writ petition was allowed on 12.01.2015 and the matter was again remanded back to the Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, to examine the application for exemption and pass appropriate orders. The Regional Deputy Commissioner passed another cryptic order dated 17.12.2015, rejecting the claim for exemption in proceedings dated 17.12.2015. The petitioner preferred an appeal on 12.02.2016 to the Taxation Appellate Tribunal. The Taxation Appellate Tribunal returned the appeal as not maintainable, stating inter alia that as there was no assessment order as per Form 10 and therefore, the appeal would not lie. Thereafter, an undated notice for demand and arrears of demand on the 16th May 2017, calling the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.1,07,78,031/- vide Bill No.04885, the wr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top