Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

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