Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Manthena Satyanarana Raju Charitable Trust Vs Union of India (Telangana High Court)
Appeal Number : WP No. 33798 of 2016
Date of Judgement/Order : 07/02/2017
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Manthena Satyanarana Raju Charitable Trust Vs Union of India (Telangana High Court)

petitioner was providing various services, such as, steam bath, sauna/infrared bath, foot and arm bath, whirlpool bath, circular jet, full emersion bath, spinal spray, spinal bath, hip bath, hydro deluxe bath, jacuzi, mud bath, neem paste bath, plant leaf bath, sand bath, massage, mud packs, vibro massages, physiotherapy, exercises, yoga, meditation, colon therapy, etc. On the basis of the said information, the 2nd respondent came to the conclusion that what was offered by the petitioner fell under the category of “health and fitness services” and that therefore, service tax was payable by the petitioner.

In response to the show cause notice issued, the petitioner sent a reply contending that they were actually providing nature cure treatment; that their main activity was to spread awareness of health by way of naturopathy, food therapy, water therapy and yoga at their premises and that their main activities could be divided into two parts, the first dealing with the creation of public awareness and the second dealing with the provision of nature cure treatment to the clients in their premises.

After giving an opportunity of personal hearing, the 2nd respondent came to the conclusion that the various therapies and treatments provided by the petitioner under the system of medicine of naturopathy, were only incidental to the over all services of physical well being and fitness. Therefore, the 2nd respondent came to the conclusion that what was done by the petitioner fell under the category of health and fitness services, and liable to be taxed.

Unfortunately, the 2nd respondent has failed to take note of the scope and ambit of the exemption notification bearing No.25/2012, dated 20.06.2012. If we have a look at para-2(k) of the exemption notification, it will be clear that the petitioner satisfies both the limbs indicated in sub-clause (a) and (b) of Clause (i) of para-2(k). The petitioner is allegedly indulging in public awareness and the petitioner is also indulging in the spreading of public health by way of care and Therefore, even on the basis of the findings recorded in para-30.2 it is not possible to conclude that the activities carried on by the petitioner would not fall within para-2(k) of the exemption notification.“In fine the objective of MSCT is lifestyle correction by inculcating good habits and achieving physical and mental wellbeing and fitness of body and mind. I observe that provision of various therapies and treatments under the system of medicine of naturopathy was incidental to the service of MSCT of providing physical well being and fitness.” An important aspect to be taken note of is that under Serial No.2 of the exemption notification health care services by a clinical establishment is exempted from payment of service tax.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031