TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 679X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndents are taking a different stand by giving exemption to the petitioner's movie, they cannot now say that the exemption will come into effect only from 31.03.2016 and not from the date of release of the movie. Once the first respondent had decided to grant exemption of the entertainment tax, exemption should come into effect only from the date of release of the movie and not from the date of issuance of the Government Order. The Order passed by the first respondent dated 31.12.2015 is proved to be erroneous, by the issuance of the present Government Order dated 31.03.2016. By following the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lloyd Electric and Engineering Limited vs State of Himachal Pradesh and Others [2015 (9) TMI 370 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate for the said Tamil Movie. 3. A six members Commitee, consisting of four non-official members, appointed by the second respondent, from the list of 22 names, mentioned in the Government Order, along with two official members, viewed the film and out of the six members, three members have given their recommendation in favour of granting exemption of entertainment tax and three members have given their opinion against the exemption of entertainment tax for the Tamil Movie g[fH; . 4. Based on the Circular dated 09.01.2012, since the members are equally divided with regard to the grant of exemption, the first respondent rejected the request, made by the petitioner for the grant of exemption of entertianment tax on 31.12.2015. Aggrieve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondents also filed a report to that effect before this court which was also taken on record. Since the five members Viewing Committee had given an unanimous report, stating that the petitioner's movie g[fH; is entitled for exemption for entertainment tax, this Court directed the respondents to process the application, submitted by the petitioner, for exemption of entertainment tax, taking into consideration the report of five members Viewing Committee. 9. Thereafter, when the matter came up for hearing on 28.03.2016, a representation was made by the learned Additional Government Pleader, stating that the respondents have decided to grant entertainment tax exemption to the Tamil Movie g[fH; , however, since the model code of co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows: 14. The State Government cannot speak in two voices. Once the Cabinet takes a policy decision to extend its 2004 Industrial Policy in the matter of CST concession to the eligible units beyond 31-3-2009, up to 31-3-2013, and the Notification dated 29-5-2009, accordingly, having been issued by the Department concerned viz. Department of Industries, thereafter, the Excise and Taxation Department cannot take a different stand. What is given by the right hand cannot be taken by the left hand. The Government shall speak only in one voice. It has only one policy. The departments are to implement the government policy and not their own policy. Once the Council of Ministers has taken a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated in Himachal Pradesh which commenced/commences production on or after 31-12-2004, but will not include any industrial unit which is formed as a result of re-establishment, mere change of ownership, change in the constitution, re-structuring or revival of an existing industrial unit; (ii) existing industrial unit means an industrial unit which commenced production before 31-12-2004; 17. Even otherwise, it is not altogether a new concession that has been notified by the Excise and Taxation Department in the impugned Notification dated 18-6-2009. As we have noted above, it is an extension of the 2004 Industrial Policy and the resultant tax concession to the eligible units which was available up to 31-3-2009. Therefore, for all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2015 and when the respondents are taking a different stand by giving exemption to the petitioner's movie, they cannot now say that the exemption will come into effect only from 31.03.2016 and not from the date of release of the movie. The judgment, relied upon by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, squarely applies to the facts and circumstances of the present case. Once the first respondent had decided to grant exemption of the entertainment tax, exemption should come into effect only from the date of release of the movie and not from the date of issuance of the Government Order. The Order passed by the first respondent dated 31.12.2015 is proved to be erroneous, by the issuance of the present Government Order dated 31.03.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
