THE Supreme Court's recent decision to uphold an appellate tribunal's ruling on taxing yoga camps organised by the Patanjali Yogpeeth Trust marks a significant stride towards equity and accountability in the realm of service taxation. The verdict underscores the principle that no entity should be exempted from contributing to the public coffers when it comes to commercial ventures. In October last year, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal had ruled that yoga camps conducted for a fee — even if in the name of 'donation' — by the trust constituted a 'health and fitness service' and were subject to service tax. It was a reasonable interpretation of the law as the tribunal rightly observed that the services rendered were akin to those provided by health clubs and fitness centres, falling within the taxable category. The trust's argument that its services were aimed at curing ailments and, therefore, not taxable did not hold water.

The ruling follows a few similar verdicts, such as the one given by the Kerala High Court in February. The HC held that the fee for yoga and meditation was subject to taxation under the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act. Uniformity in legal interpretation across jurisdictions reinforces the principle of equality before the law and ensures consistency in tax administration. This also highlights the broader issue of responsible advertising and consumer protection. The scrutiny faced by Patanjali Ayurved under the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act of 1954 makes it imperative for the firm to ensure that claims made in advertisements, especially those related to health and wellness, are truthful and substantiated.

Though undoubtedly beneficial for physical and mental wellbeing, yoga is increasingly becoming commercialised. It is imperative that our legal framework adapts accordingly, striking a balance between fostering entrepreneurship and safeguarding public interest.