Lethargy Is Not an Exceptional Circumstance: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Striking Off of Defence for Delay in Filing Written Statement Vague Decree of Injunction Can’t Be Executed by Attaching Machines: Rajasthan High Court Strikes Down Execution Order Mere permission to join proceedings without allowing filing of written statement is illusory: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Proceedings Unregistered Power of Attorney Can’t Transfer Property: MP High Court Denies Title, Dismisses Ejectment Suit Mere Non-Recovery of Weapon Is Not Fatal When Circumstantial and Medical Evidence Prove Guilt Beyond Doubt: Allahabad High Court Failure to Examine Gazetted Officer and Magistrate Who Certified Seizure Goes to Root of Fair Trial Under NDPS Act : Calcutta High Court Tender Years Doctrine Is No Longer Good Law: Delhi High Court Slams Mother’s Custody Claim Built on Parental Alienation Negation of Bail is the Rule in NDPS Cases Involving Commercial Quantity: Himachal Pradesh High Court Denies Bail Single Stab Injury in Heat of Passion During Sudden Quarrel Is Not Murder: Kerala High Court Section 10 CPC Inapplicable To Labour Court Proceedings; Stay Of Individual Disputes Denied: Karnataka High Court 138 NI Act | Once Issuance and Signature on Cheque Are Admitted, Burden Shifts on Accused to Dislodge Statutory Presumption: Madras High Court Confession Cannot Substitute Proof: Bombay High Court Acquits Husband Convicted of Wife’s Murder "Sole Eyewitness Testimony, Corroborated by Medical and Recovery Evidence, Is Enough to Sustain Conviction Under Section 302 IPC: Allahabad High Court Partition Once Effected Cannot Be Reopened on Vague Allegations of Fraud: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Registered Family Partition Deed Cancellation of Land Acquisition Compensation Without Allegation or Hearing Is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Restores Compensation to Innocent Land Owner Whether Act Was in Discharge of Official Duty Is a Question of Fact — Magistrate, Not High Court, Must Decide: Supreme Court Restricts Writ Interference in BNSS Cases Section 175(4) BNSS | Affidavit Is Not Optional — Even Complaints Against Public Servants Must Follow Procedural Rigour: Supreme Court Magistrate Cannot Be Directed to Recall His Judicial Order by a Writ Court: Supreme Court Warns Against Article 226 Interference in Pending Criminal Proceedings Even In Absence of Written Demand, If Substantial Dispute Exists or Is Apprehended, Reference Under Section 10 ID Act Is Valid: Supreme Court Absence of Classical Signs of Strangulation and Possibility of Hanging Nullifies Homicidal Theory: Supreme Court Holds Medical Evidence Alone Cannot Prove Guilt Confession Must Be Direct Acknowledgment of Guilt, Not Mere Presence at Scene: Supreme Court Slams Misuse of Section 164 CrPC Reversal of Acquittal Without Dislodging Trial Court’s Reasoning Is Impermissible: Supreme Court Restores Acquittal

High Court of Kerala Upholds Strict Interpretation of Charitable Purpose for Building Tax Exemption

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


“It is only in those cases where the charitable purpose sought to be established is the provision of medical relief that the legislature stipulates that the relief provided must be ‘free’.” – High Court of Kerala

In a recent judgment, the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam has reaffirmed the strict interpretation of the term “charitable purpose” for the purpose of claiming exemption from building tax under the Kerala Building Tax Act. The court held that only free medical relief qualifies as a charitable purpose under the Act, ruling out the eligibility of M/s. Lisie Medical Institutions for the exemption.

The judgment, delivered by the Honorable Mr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and the Honorable Mr. Justice Mohammed Nias C.P., stated, “It is not in dispute that the building of the appellant was not principally used for providing free medical relief as required under the statutory provision for inclusion under the definition of charitable purpose.” The court further noted that the appellant’s expenditure towards free medical relief was nominal and did not meet the threshold for substantial relief.

The court emphasized the importance of a strict interpretation of exemption provisions, stating, “An exemption provision is like an exception and, on the normal principle of construction or interpretation of statutes, it is construed strictly either because of legislative intention or on economic justification of inequitable burden or progressive approach of fiscal provisions intended to augment state revenue.” It highlighted that while exemptions should be given full effect once applicable, at the entry stage, a strict interpretation must be followed.

The judgment also considered the appellant’s contention as a charitable institution under the Income Tax Act. However, the court found that even if a liberal interpretation were applied, the appellant’s building did not qualify for exemption based on the extent of medical relief provided.

This decision affirms previous judgments, including SH Medical Centre Hospital v. State of Kerala and Unity Hospital, which established that only free medical relief constitutes a charitable purpose for the purpose of building tax exemption under the Act. The court’s ruling demonstrates the importance of complying with statutory requirements and the limited scope for alternative forms of medical relief to qualify as charitable purposes.

With this judgment, the High Court has provided clarity on the interpretation of the exemption provision and reiterated the necessity of meeting the strict requirements for claiming building tax exemption for charitable purposes.

Date of Decision: July 10, 2023

M/S. LISIE MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS vs THE STATE OF KERALA

Latest Legal News