A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court confirmed demand of luxury tax in the absence of figures substantiated by accounts maintained by the assessee, Bethsaida Hermitage & Tourism (P) Ltd.
The petitioner assessee was assessed to tax under the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act for the assessment year 2014-2015 on the room rent and ayurveda treatment charges as also the miscellaneous income, transportation charges and yoga and meditation charges for the said year. The case of the petitioner before the authorities below was that it had been subjected to tax at a higher rate on the aforesaid income by treating it as a hotel and not as a hospital.
The First Appellate Authority before whom the petitioner had preferred an appeal against the order of assessment, excluded the entire turnover representing the cost of medicines and professional charges, and the balance amount alone was subjected to assessment under the head ayurvedic treatment income.
In the further appeal before the Tribunal, the Tribunal found that it was the petitioner assessee himself who had specified the excluded turnover in terms of Section 4(2)(e) of the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act and under the said circumstances whatever was declared as not excluded was correctly subjected to tax under the Act by the lower authority.
A Division Bench of Dr Justice AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Dr Justice Kauser Edappagath observed that “It is based on the submissions of the assessee himself and the figures declared by the assessee that the said turnover was subjected to tax under the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act. In the absence of any figures substantiated by the accounts maintained by the assessee, produced at any stage before the authorities below, we see no reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Tribunal confirming the demand of tax under the said head.”
“We are of the view that if the petitioner has any grievance regarding the correctness of the said order of the assessing authority, to the extent it does not adhere to the directions of the Tribunal in the order, it is for him to agitate the same before the appellate authority, on merits. Thus, without prejudice to the last-mentioned liberty reserved to the petitioner, we dismiss this OP ( TAX ) as devoid of merit.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
