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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 10066

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J
MOTHER SUPERIOR, S.H.STUDY HOUSE CONVENT, NIRMALA PROVINCE OF THE SECRET HEART CONGREGATION – Appellant
Versus
THE TAHSILDAR, MANANTHAVADY – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 14130 OF 2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.JIJO PAUL KALLOOKKARAN
For the Respondents: SRI.ALEN PRIYADARSHINI DEV

Religious institutions are entitled to tax exemptions under the Kerala Building Tax Act when their dominant activity is religious, irrespective of residential use.

Headnote:The writ petition challenges the assessment orders under the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, claiming exemption for a religious institution. The Court found precedent from the Supreme Court recognizing religious institutions' entitlement to tax exemption. The exemption was denied based on residential use, which the Court determined doesn't alter the nature of the building's religious use. Ultimately, the Court allowed the petition, granting the tax exemption sought by the petitioner.

Table of Content
1. petitioner challenges tax assessment orders. (Para 1)
2. court hears arguments for exemption. (Para 2)
3. court rules in favor of the petitioner. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition seeking to challenge Exts.P1 and P2 Assessment orders under the provisions of the Kerala Building Tax Act , 1975, contending that the petitioner, being a religious institution, is entitled for exemption from payment of tax.

2. Heard Sri Jijo Paul Kallookaran, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Sri. Alan Priyadershi Dev, the learned Government Pleader.

3. This Court takes note of the judgment of the Apex Court in Government of Kerala and Another v. Mother Superior Adoration Convent [2021 (5) SCC 602] , wherein the Apex Court, considering a similar claim, categorically found that when the “dominant” activity is religious, the benefit of exemption requires to be extended. Therefore, prima facie, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is justified in contending that it is entitled for exemption. However, this Court takes note of the contention raised by Sri. Alan Priyadershini Dev, with reference to the observations contained in paragraph No.7 of Ext.P12 order issued by the Government to the effect that the exemption with respect to prayer room has already been extended and it is only for the balance portion, which are used for housing the elderly nuns, the benefit of exemption is being denied. However, in my opinion, merely for the reason that the balance area is used for residence of elderly nuns, that by itself would not change the character of the activity – religious activity with respect to the building in question.

4. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the contention raised by Sri.Alan Priyadershni Dev, only requires to be recorded and rejected.

On the whole, I am of the opinion that this writ petition requires to be allowed. Therefore, this writ petition would stand allowed, setting aside Ext.P12 order issued by the Government and declaring that the petitioner would be entitled for exemption from payment of building tax under the provision of the Kerala Building Tax Act , 1975.

Sd/-

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