Karnataka High Court
Timezone Entertainment Private ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 August, 2011
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
Bench: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 03° DAY OF MARCH 2018 , © BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADL G. RAMES H WRIT PETITION NOS. 32886. 888 OF 201001 fe E ) TIMEZONE ENTERTAIN MENT. PRIVATE "LIMITED UNIT NO.308, 3RD FLOOR: ~ Be FORUM VALUE MALL, NO.62, -- WHITEFIELD) MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE 360 066. (REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR) MR. VIVEK MA THUR, AGED 41 YEARS) .. PETITIONER (By Sriv tiths A RAM AY D. 5: VENKATESH, S.P.S CHAUHAN, SANDEFP K R, ADVS) ° Co "THE STATE OF KARNATAKA _ REPKESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY, " VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE I - THE ENTERTAINMENT TAX OFFICER 4TH CIRCLE, GROUND FLOOR, SRINIVASA COMPLEX. SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE 560 020 . RESPONDENTS
be wo i (By Sri. K MSH IVAYOGISWAMY, HOCGP) PRAYING TO QUASH THE RESPONDENT'S ORDERS DTD 14.9.10 VIDE NANEXS- EB, F-&.G AND DEMAND NOTICES DTD 15.9.10 MARKED AS ANEXS-.H, HI & H2- IN SO FAR AS THEY LEVY ENTERTAINMENT TAX ON:
THE AMUSEMENTS -- BRING PROVIDED BY THE PETITIONER COSTING LESS THAN Rs,50 PER GAME.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS "COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN "B* GROUP THIS DAY. THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
% . OR RDER In these petitions, petitioner has sought for to issue writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Entertainment Tax Officer "at Annexures &, F and G and alse Annexures H, H1 and H2, the detand notices issued,
2. Heard,
3. Referring to Section 2(e)Ui) the definition clause and also Section 4-E of the Karnataka Entertainment Tax Act. 1938, the petitioner's counsel contends that as per. the exhaustive ™. collected for participation which is below Rs.S0/-, cannot be. treated as one coming within the purview of Entertainment Tax to be charged under Section 4@ and 4F of the Act.
4. The Asséssment Oificer however, having opined that the nature of the activity ci ried out by the petitioner is subject Lo Entertainment Tax, ; hel that the actual participation and entry into the amusement area are two distimct aspects and accordingly, proceeded fo pass the assessment order and : 7 quantified the tax payable, against which, petitioner is before this Court raising several contentions and also on the ground _ that entertainment fee collected is below Rs.50/-, as such, it is not taxable.
7 ¥ ode
5. Petitioner under the apprehension that the appellate authority would not act contrary either to the circular issued by the Commissioner or the decision of the Comission, bas straightaway approached this Court. 7 Accting to him, based on the decision taken in the suO- moio re 'vision proceedings in some other case, the Assessment Offic ch proceed d - levy Entertainment Tax on the peti: joner sid Section 2A of the Act requires further j terpr etation. ait. the hans of this Court since the appellate sini woul id vor tAK rea a different decision than ihe decision taken _ by "the Commissioner in the suomoto proceedin gs.
"6. Since aiready amount has been paid and matter ». Yequires inteipy retation, for further clarification as provided under Section 8 of the Act, it is for the petitioner to approach "the appellate authority. All contentions are left open to be . wrged," If the petitioner is aggrieved by any such order to he passed, he is at liberty to approach the appellate Tribunal or to a ae ¥ fads seek for a revision as is provided under law and then to approach this Court.
Accordingly, petitions are disposed. of. 7 Sa/*. 7 ST TOT | wilco Ps.
Bip JUDGE.
HVGRI 11" August, 2011 ORDERS ON BEING SPOKEN TO In-para 6.of the order, petitioner was directed to approach the appellate authority seeking clarification as per S.8B of the Act, The apprehension expressed. by.the' petitioner's counsel is, since the appellate autherity is not-above the Commissioner, it may not take a different view as Such, he has sought for a direction fo move the Appellate Tribunal in stead of the appellate authority. Counsel has
- also retied-upott the case of FPilteree & Anr Vs Commissioner of Sales Tax. Madhya Pradesh & Anrv - V:61 STC 3178 on the issue. Liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the Appellate "Tripanal a stead of the appellate authority withm two weeks from he date of receipt of this order.