Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1992 (8) TMI 243

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of a better quality cinema house as compared to a cinema house which has a lesser annual rental value. We are, therefore, of the view that there is nothing unreasonable or improper in classifying the cinema houses on the basis of annual rental value. The learned counsel for the petitioners has not raised any other point before us. - Writ Petition No. 2426, 2427, 2428, 2449 of 1980, - - - Dated:- 4-8-1992 - KULDIP SINGH AND RAMASWAMY K. JJ. Writ Petition No. 2426, 2427, 2428, 2449 of 1980, Writ Petition No. 2430, Writ Petition No. 2431, Writ Petition No. 2432, Writ Petition No. 2433, Writ Petition No. 2434, Writ Petition No. 2435, Writ Petition No. 2436, Writ Petition No. 2437, Writ Petition No. 2438, Writ Petition No. 2439, Writ Pe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Constitution of India to impose in the State. (3) The Mahapalika taxes shall be assessed and levied in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the Rules and bye-laws framed thereunder. (4) Nothing in this section shall authorise the imposition of any tax which the State Legislature has no power to impose in the State under the Constitution of India." "2. In this Act unless there be something repugnant to the subject or context- (77) 'theatre tax' means a tax on amusement or entertainments." Sub-section (1) of section 199 of the Act requires the Nagar Mahapalika to make a preliminary proposal specifying the tax which it desires to impose under section 172(2) of the Act, the persons or class of persons to be made liable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... laid. The proposal of the Nagar Mahapalika, Lucknow, to levy theatre tax at Rs. 5 per cinema show held in a building assessed on annual rental value of Rs. 10,000 or more and at Rs. 3 per cinema show held in a building assessed on annual rental value of less than Rs. 10,000, was accepted by the State Government by following the procedure laid down under the Act. The Rules called the Lucknow Nagar Mahapalika Theatre Tax Rules were framed and enforced with effect from December 15, 1965 and thereafter the tax was levied with effect from June 1, 1967. The rate of tax was increased from time to time and finally by a Notification dated October 30, 1979, published in the U.P. Government Gazette dated October 31, 1979, the theatre tax was enhance .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... imposition of theatre tax on various grounds. The said petition is still pending before the High Court. The learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that section 172(2) of the Act is unconstitutional because the Legislature has abdicated its function by delegating the essential legislative powers upon the Nagar Palikas to levy all or any of the taxes enumerated in the section. According to him the said power is unguided and uncanalised. We do not agree with the learned counsel. Section 172(2) of the Act authorises the Mahapalikas to impose the taxes mentioned therein, "for the purposes of this Act". The obligations and functions cast upon the Mahapalikas are laid down in various provisions of the Act. The taxes under section 17 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Constitution of India. According to him the classification has no nexus with the objects sought to be achieved. We do not agree. In Western India Theatres Ltd. v. Cantonment Board, Poona Cantonment [1959] Supp 2 SCR 63, the Cantonment Board, Poona, imposed entertainment tax on cinemas. Rs. 10 per show was levied on the two cinemas of Western India Theatres Ltd. and Rs. 5 per show in other cases. The argument raised before this Court to the effect that the Cantonment Board had singled out the two cinema houses for discriminatory treatment by imposing higher rate of tax, was answered as under: "It may not be unreasonable or improper if a higher tax is imposed on the shows given by a cinema house which contains large seating accommodatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates