Policy-based tourism incentive classification upheld where no arbitrariness or parity between unit classes was shown.

A tourism incentive classification limiting exemption to 'A' class units was analysed under Article 14 and held to rest on a valid policy basis. The court noted that the classification was linked to location, investment and other tourism-development factors, and that the petitioner did not show comparable material establishing parity between 'A' and 'B' class units. Because the distinction was neither arbitrary nor illusory, the legitimate expectation and equality challenge failed. The exemption scheme was therefore not extended to the petitioner, and no relief was granted on the ground of discrimination.

---

---

Issues: Whether the extension of exemption under the 2004 Government Resolution, limited to 'A' class tourism units, was discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and whether the petitioner was entitled to the claimed exemption benefit.

Analysis: The petitioner sought to equate its 'B' class tourism unit with 'A' class units and invoked legitimate expectation and equality under Article 14. The classification under the tourism incentive policy, however, was based on location, investment, and other relevant factors connected with tourism development and incentive structuring. No comparable material was shown to establish parity between the classes or to demonstrate that the distinction was arbitrary or illusory. The exemption framework reflected a policy choice, and the schemes referred to were separate with different features and application. In the absence of proof of unconstitutional discrimination, judicial interference was unwarranted.

Conclusion: The classification was held to be valid and not violative of Article 14. The petitioner was not entitled to extension of the exemption benefit claimed under the 2004 Government Resolution.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the restrictive application of the tourism incentive exemption failed, and no relief was granted on the ground of discrimination.

Ratio Decidendi: A policy-based classification in fiscal incentive schemes will not be struck down under Article 14 unless it is shown to be arbitrary, lacking relevant basis, or unsupported by intelligible differentia.

---