Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Uncategorized (needs manual review)Supreme Court of India

The State of Maharashtra vs Shri Vile Parle Kelvani Mandal & Ors.

Civil AppealDecided 7 Jan 2022
Civil Appeal No. 7319 of 2021
M.R. Shah · Sanjiv Khanna

Background

Under the earlier Maharashtra Electricity Duty Act, 1958, charitable educational institutions registered under the Bombay/Maharashtra Public Trusts Act were expressly exempted from paying electricity duty. In 2016, the State replaced this law with the Maharashtra Electricity Duty Act, 2016, and the new Section 3(2) no longer contained a clause specifically exempting such charitable trust-run schools/colleges: the surviving education exemption applied only to institutions "run by local bodies." Electricity companies began billing the respondent trust's schools for duty from September 2016 onward. The Bombay High Court held that the institutions remained exempt and quashed the demand; the State appealed.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that an exemption provision in a taxing statute must be interpreted strictly and literally, based purely on its actual wording. Courts cannot read in an exemption that the legislature chose not to carry forward. Comparing the two statutes' wording, it found that the 2016 Act's education exemption, unlike its 1958 predecessor, only covers institutions run by local bodies, and deliberately dropped the earlier clause covering charitable-trust-run schools and colleges. The Court rejected arguments based on absurdity, discrimination, and the "doctrine of last antecedent," holding that accepting the trust's broader reading would produce its own absurdity, even profit-making private hospitals and clinics would then claim exemption. Since the wording was clear and unambiguous, there was no scope for a purposive interpretation in the exemption's favour, and the benefit of any doubt in an exemption clause (unlike a charging provision) does not automatically go to the assessee. The Court allowed the State's appeal, holding the charitable education institutions liable for electricity duty from 8 August 2016 onward.

Lesson Learnt

When a tax exemption that existed in an old law is not carried forward, in the same words, into its replacement law, courts will not "read it back in": an exemption clause must be construed strictly and literally by its actual text, not by what seems fair or was the practice under the earlier law.

The State of Maharashtra vs Shri Vile Parle Kelvani Mandal & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware