9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1273X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng authority under the Delhi Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1996, and the appellate orders dated 11th June, 2013 passed by the Deputy Commissioner and 11th July, 2017 passed by the Financial Commissioner. 2. Order dated 31st January, 2013 had directed the petitioner society and Zobra Entertainment Private Limited to pay an amount of Rs. 10,26,519/- as entertainment tax including interest and penalty, failing which action would be taken against both of them for recovery of the amount. The first appellate order dated 11th June, 2013 passed by the Deputy Commissioner affirms the said order and had directed that the petitioner society would be blacklisted for furnishing false information to the department by applying for "No Objection Cert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to comply with directions laid down in notification dated 16th October, 2006, file detailed account of the performance including proceeds of the gate money, copy of the audit report for last financial year from a qualified Charted Accountant within fifteen days of the event, all incomes from the performance including the gate money would be credited to the petitioner society and there would be ceiling of Rs. 500 on admission fee. There was another stipulation that income received by way of sponsorship/donation should not exceed Rs. 50,00,000. 6. On 2nd December, 2012, Excise Intelligence Bureau had raided the premises at 166, MG Road, Ghitorni, New Delhi and had detected misuse of P-10 Excise permit and violations of the terms of grant o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e about 250 persons present in the said event. Relying upon the agreement furnished by the petitioner, it was held that Rs. 1500/-, Rs. 2500/- 5,000/- and 6,000/- were charged for tickets for entry to the event. On the basis of the agreement the Entertainment Tax Officer in absence of details, bifurcated the entry ticket amounts amongst 250 persons who were present and held that Entertainment Tax of Rs. 1,07,700/- was chargeable on the said tickets. On the basis of documents submitted by the petitioner, he came to the conclusion that Rs. 5,36,847/- was received as donation. As noted above, the petitioner has given up challenge to the aforesaid amounts. 12. The Entertainment Tax Officer thereafter held that the petitioner must have received ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as per law for recovery of the Government revenue." 13. Other than aforesaid quotation, there is no other discussion in the order dated 31st January, 2013 relating to the sponsorship money. No document or any other material, to show that any sponsorship money was received, has been adverted to and relied. 14. We have also examined the appellate orders and find that there is no discussion on the aforesaid aspect and evidence in support of the said finding. 15. Counsel for the petitioner has rightly urged that the petitioner had never accepted or admitted having received any sponsorship money. The petitioner had given full details of the donations received and furnished a copy of their bank accounts. It is not the case that figure of Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
