No GST on LWA Fee for Private Jobs | AAR Kerala

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

GST on LWA fee AAR Kerala ruling Leave without allowance GST Directorate of Medical Education GST exemption Non-supply under GST
Case Details : Directorate of Medical Education (2025) 32 Centax 326 (A.A.R. - GST - Ker.) 

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • S/Shri Jomy Jacob IRS and Mansur M.I., Members
  •  Shri S.R. Rajesh, Authorized Representative. for the Applicant.

Facts of the Case

The applicant, the Directorate of Medical Education, submitted an application to the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) seeking clarification regarding the applicability of GST on the fees collected from medical officers, nursing staff, and paramedical staff under the Medical Education Department who intend to avail leave without allowance (LWA) for private employment. The applicant clarified that the fee was imposed solely as a regulatory measure intended to discourage indiscriminate availing of such leave, which could detrimentally impact public healthcare delivery. It was further explained that the fee did not involve any element of supply of goods or services, nor was it collected in the course or furtherance of any business activity. The matter was accordingly placed before the AAR, Kerala. 

 

High Court Held

The AAR Kerala held that the Directorate is not engaged in any commercial activity in levying the fee, and there exists no contractual obligation on the part of the applicant to tolerate the act of availing leave. The payment made by the employee does not constitute consideration for any service rendered. The fee is collected as an internal administrative measure and does not involve any supply within the meaning of Section 7 of the CGST Act or the Kerala GST Act. Accordingly, it was held that the fee collected does not qualify as a taxable supply, and therefore, no GST is applicable. 

List of Cases Cited

Care College of Nursing v. Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences 2024 (86) G.S.T.L. 244/(2023) 12 Centax 216 (Telangana) — Referred [Para 7.2.6]
Manappuram Finance Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner of Central Tax and Excise 2023 (69) G.S.T.L. 141/(2022) 1 Centax 120 (Ker.) — Referred [Para 7.1.8]

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published.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

Related Stories
No Export Duty on Iron Ore Fines Below 58% Fe | CESTAT

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

January 31, 2026

NDPS Case | SC Allows Interim Release of Foreign Vessel

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

January 30, 2026

Government Revises Tariff Values For Edible Oils, Gold And Silver

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

January 29, 2026

Gold Smuggling Via Diplomatic Cargo Leads To Licence Revocation | SC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

January 28, 2026

Commercial Frying System Classifiable Under HSN 8438 | CESTAT

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

January 24, 2026

Namkeen Frying System Classifiable Under HSN 8438 | CESTAT

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

January 23, 2026

Customs Can’t Alter FOB Or Recompute Drawback | CESTAT

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

January 22, 2026

CBL Regulations Breach, Licence Revocation Set Aside, Penalty Upheld

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

January 21, 2026

CBIC Grants One-Time QCO Exemption For Cross Recessed Screws

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

January 20, 2026

RoSCTL Benefits Extended To Postal Exports Via E-Entry

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

January 19, 2026