2011 (2) TMI 1306

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ai Kalyana Soudha Samudaya Bhavan, Nanjangud v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, District Circle 1, Mysore [2006] 146 STC 473 (Karn); [2003] 54 KLJ Page 208 while the later decision of the apex court in Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. v. State of U.P. [2005] 139 STC 537 (SC) redefined the scope of the term "luxury" by interpreting item 62, List II of Schedule VII to the Constitution of India. According to the learned single judge though the Division Bench examined the validity of section 3C of the Karnataka Tax on Luxuries Act, 1979, for short, "the Act", and interpreted the section to mean the charge provided in a marriage hall as in section 3C, is actually on charges for luxury provided, nevertheless there was a need to consider th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion for the following reliefs: "(a) A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorarie quashing the final endorsement dated December 14, 2001 bearing No. ACCT/ T-I/2001-2 made by respondent 2 as per annexure E; (b) A writ, order or direction declaration that the petitioner is not liable to pay luxury tax for giving on hire M. Vishweshwaraiah Auditorium and conference hall in the premises of the petitioner; (c) A writ, order or direction declaring that amendment of section 5(5B) by Act 4 of 1999 is void on the ground of colourable exercise of the power of Legislature insofar as it includes seminar, convention, banquets and meetings; (d) Any other writ, order or direction as deemed just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....P. Nos. 27454-56 of 2009 dated January 22, 2011), having regard to the definition of the terms "marriage hall" in section 2(5B) of the Act, held that a building or part thereto where accommodation is provided for marriage, reception or matters related therewith, would alone be chargeable to luxury tax under section 3C of the Act. In the factual matrix noticed supra, there being no dispute that building having portions, viz., Sir M.Visweshwaraiah Auditorium and conference hall, belonging to the petitioner, conceived for use to public more appropriately, holding exhibition of books, engineering goods, seminars, workshops, board meetings, conferences, etc., not providing facilities such as furniture, electricity, decoration, etc., and not pe....