TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 641X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r similarly situated theatres were allowed to furnish the certificates from the Film Development Corporation later and not in advance. This assertion by the petitioner company was not rebutted by the third respondent in her counter-affidavit. No explanation is forthcoming even now as to why the petitioner company alone is being picked upon for violation of the condition of furnishing the certificates in advance. The third respondent also does not dispute that the certificates were produced by the petitioner company after release of the movies and there is no shortcoming or lacuna in this regard - The assessment orders, which proceeded only on the premise that such benefit could not be extended to the petitioner company owing to belated production of the certificates, therefore cannot be countenanced. Impugned Order set aside - petition allowed. - WRIT PETITION NOS.1008 AND 2331 OF 2019 - - - Dated:- 6-9-2019 - SRI SANJAY KUMAR AND SRI P. KESHAVA RAO, JJ. For The Petitioner : RUBAINA S KHATOON For The Respondent : GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX TG COMMON ORDER ( Per Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount of ₹ 13,16,059/-. However, the third respondent issued an assessment order on 16.03.2016 stating that the petitioner company was not entitled to claim exemption under G.O.Ms.No.604 dated 22.04.2008 as it had not furnished details of the low budget films screened by it in its theatres in writing in advance, as required under the said G.O. The petitioner company was called upon to pay the sum of ₹ 23,81,928/- towards the evaded entertainment tax amount for the years 2012-13 to 2014-15. Thereafter, the third respondent issued reminder notice dated 30.08.2016 calling upon the petitioner company to file its objections to the show-cause notice dated 15.12.2015, failing which the demand therein would be confirmed. The petitioner company submitted representation dated 01.09.2016 informing the third respondent that it had already submitted tax certificates for the differential tax amount of ₹ 86,30,675/- under its letter dated 11.01.2016 and that representations had been made by it to the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes on 31.01.2016 and 04.07.2016 to make necessary corrections in the guidelines stipulated under G.O.Ms.No.604 dated 22.04.2008. The third respondent ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent pointed out that the assessment orders in question were passed on 16.03.2016 and 20.03.2017 but the petitioner company chose to keep quiet till January, 2019 when it filed the present writ petitions. The writ petitions were therefore hit by delay and laches, as the petitioner company did not offer any explanation for its lassitude. The third respondent further pointed out that remedy of appeal was available to the petitioner company under Section 9(B) of the Act of 1939, but the petitioner company did not choose to avail the same within time. The third respondent asserted that once the assessee failed to comply with the conditions prescribed in the exemption G.O., it would not be entitled to qualify for or claim benefit thereunder. On these grounds, the third respondent sought dismissal of the writ petitions. 4. Heard Mr.S.Niranjan Reddy, learned senior counsel appearing for Ms.Rubaina S.Kahtoon, learned counsel for the petitioner company, and Mr.Jukanti Anil Kumar, learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes, State of Telangana, for the respondents. 5. At the outset, it would be appropriate to examine G.O.Ms.No.604 dated 22.04.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in Andhra Pradesh which was being screened but also furnish a certified copy of the certificate of the Film Development Corporation. 6. Mr.S.Niranjan Reddy, learned senior counsel, would assert that the condition that the certificate from the Film Development Corporation should be produced in advance was incapable of compliance as such certificate would only be issued by the said Corporation only after release of the movie. He would point out that even as per Clause (2), set out supra, a low budget film was a film which is produced with less than 35 prints and argue that the Film Development Corporation could only issue certification as to whether a particular feature film qualified as a low budget film after its release, by counting the number of prints that had been produced and released. He would contend that when the exemption G.O. prescribed a condition which was incapable of being performed, it was not open to the third respondent to insist upon strict compliance. The learned senior counsel would assert that necessary certificates were produced before the third respondent after release of the movies in question. He would point out that it was not the case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... VICE TAX V/s. R.R. GLOBAL ENTERPRISES (P.) LTD. (2016) 58 GST 13 (A.P. 9. At this stage, we may note that though the third respondent raised the issue of delay on the part of the petitioner company in filing these writ petitions, the said aspect was not pressed into service during the course of arguments. In any event, technicalities would not be binding constraints upon exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction vesting in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. All the more so, when the orders under challenge are patently illegal. Therefore, though there is delay on the part of the petitioner company in laying a challenge to the assessment orders in question, that by itself would be insufficient to non-suit the petitioner company, when the orders impugned in these writ petitions smack of arbitrariness and clearly demonstrate lack of application of mind. 10. Mr.Jukanti Anil Kumar, learned Special Standing Counsel, does not dispute the fact that the petitioner company could not have produced the certificates from the Film Development Corporation in advance, as required by the application form appended to G.O.Ms.No.604 dated 22.04.2008. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
