Two writ petitions challenging service tax imposition filed by a beauty parlour were dismissed as infructuous after the petitioner's counsel affirmed that the sought relief had become worthless due to a change in circumstances.
The writ petitions were dismissed as infructuous; no costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS
DATED: 24.06.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH
W.P.Nos.16755 & 16756 of 2003
M/s.Cosmopolitan Club, Rep. by its Secretary, Anna Salai, Chennai - 6000002. ...Petitioner in all WPs
Vs
COMMON PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the first respondent herein from imposing service tax in respect of the Beauty Parlour/Health and Fitness Centre conducted by the petitioner for the exclusive benefit of its members in the absence of a charging provision.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Raveendran (in all WPs)
For Respondents: Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan, SSC (in all WPs)
O R D E R
Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the relief sought for in the present writ petitions has become infructuous. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
hvk
To
+1cc to Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan , Advocate SR.No. 51907 W.P.Nos.16755 & 16756 of 2003 A.SK(30/07/2019)
M/s.Cosmopolitan Club, Rep. by its Secretary
The Superintendent of Central Excise, Service Tax Cell
The Union of India, Rep. by the Secretary, Ministry of Finance
M.S. Ramesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
