TMI Blog1991 (11) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... public exhibition of films on video, as required under the provisions of the A.P. Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955 and the Rules made thereunder. The licensing authority fixes the maximum number of persons to be admitted at a time and also the maximum rates of admission. They are mentioned in the licence. The exhibitors are liable to pay the entertainment tax and show tax levied under the A.P. Entertainments Tax Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and the Rules made thereunder. In these writ petitions, only the levy and payment of show tax under section 4-A of the Act as amended by Ordinance No. 8 of 1988 is challenged and there is no dispute about the levy and payment of the entertainment tax under section 4 of the Act. Prior ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,000 Rs. 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ With effect from 20th May, 1988, sub-section (1-A) had been inserted in section 4-A of the Act, authorising the levy and payment to the State Government a tax of Rs. 50 on every show of any film on television screen exhibited through video cassette recorder in any of the local authorities of the State, in addition to the entertainment tax payable under section 4 of the Act. Questioning the validity of this provision, these writ petitions are filed. It is not necessary to refer to the facts in each one of these writ petitions. It will suffice if we refer to the facts in one of the writ petitions, viz., W.P. No. 2314 of 1990. The petitioner had been gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , selection grade, special grade and first grade municipalities was from Rs. 6 to Rs. 12 per show; (2) Second grade and third grade municipalities was from Rs. 4 to Rs. 8 per show; (3) Gram panchayats with a population of 15,000 and above was from Rs. 2 to Rs. 4 per show. So far as the cinema theatres situated within the local limits of gram panchayats with a population of less than 15,000 are concerned, there was no enhancement in the rate of show tax and it continues to be Rs. 2 per show. The main contention advanced on behalf of the petitioners is that the exhibitors of films on television screen through video cassette recorder are subjected to clear and hostile discrimination and the provisions of subsection (1-A) of section 4-A of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in respect of such a theatre is only Rs. 12 per show and it cannot be more than Rs. 2 per show if the theatre is situated within the local limits of a gram panchayat, the population of which is less than 15,000. If that is so, we are unable to understand how a video parlour referred to above, with a seating capacity for sixteen persons where films are exhibited on television screen through video cassette recorder can be subjected to a uniform rate of show tax of Rs. 50 per show irrespective of the nature of the local area within which it is located. It is no doubt true that the Legislature has wide discretion and greatest freedom in classifying persons or property for the purpose of taxation and it can pick and choose either objects or per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by reason of a number of video parlours having come into existence, that cannot be a ground for driving the owners of video parlours out of their business under the guise of taxation. If the Legislature uses the device of taxation for the purpose of achieving the object of improving the business prospects of the exhibitors of cinematograph films at the cost of exhibitors of video films, then it will be a clear case of colourable exercise of power. Let us examine, having regard to the facts whether the provisions of sub-section (1-A) of section 4-A of the Act are confiscatory in nature, as urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The total number of seats in the petitioner-video parlour is 16. The rate of admission is Rs. 2 per se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 50 ITR 171 (SC); AIR 1963 SC 1667: "In view of the recent decisions of this Court, Mr. Sastri also concedes that taxing statutes are not beyond the pale of the constitutional limitations prescribed by articles 19 and 14, and he also concedes that the test of reasonableness prescribed by article 304(b) is justiciable. It is, of course, true that the power of taxing the people and their property is an essential attribute of the Government and Government may legitimately exercise the said power by reference to the objects to which it is applicable to the utmost extent to which Government thinks it expedient to do so. The objects to be taxed so long as they happen to be within the legislative competence of the Legislature can be taxed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
