Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Red Giant Movies, Represented by its Authorized Signatory M. Shenbagamoorthy, - Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department, Chepauk, Chennai - Respondent
W.P.Nos.11244, 11245, 30185 of 2012, 28505 of 2013, 6985 & 12050 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1, 1,1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2013 and M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2014
Decided on : 05-07-2021
Tamil Nadu Entertainments Tax Act - Commercial Tax - Grant of exemption - Challenged - Petitioner is a Firm, involved in production and distribution of films mainly in State of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner states that it has produced about eight movies and distributed several other movies throughout India - Government of Tamil Nadu under Tamil Nadu Entertainments Tax Act, 1939, granted exemption from payment of entertainment tax for the movies having their title in Tamil by passing Government Order bearing G.O.Ms.No. dated- Said Government Order was followed with another Government Order bearing G.O.Ms.No.89, dated, wherein certain additional conditions are imposed for grant of exemption from payment of Entertainment tax under Tamil Nadu Entertainments Tax Act, 1939 - Guidelines/conditions for grant of exemption under Government order are issued by first respondent/Commissioner of Commercial Tax Department in proceedings dated - Petitioner submitted an application for exemption before first respondent for their movie namely 'Idhu Kathirvelan Kadhal' – Held, Court could easily visualize possibilities of Favouritism and discrimination - However, for want of evidences and in view of fact that there is no specific malafide allegations against persons, Court is unable to consider relief as such prayed for - Committees overall exercise was improper as members of Committee have certain personal affinity with Government or Political leaders, who were ruling State- Courts cannot undo exercise in event of not establishing malafide with a concrete proof - Mere statements are insufficient - Inference can be drawn based on certain actions - In present case, Court could able to draw an inference - However, due to efflux of time, Court is not inclined to undo exercise already concluded long back - Government of day is expected to consider following aspects and appoint Committees and authorities in Government organizations and institutions - Writ petitions stand disposed of.
ORDER :
1. The Writ Petition in W.P.No.11244 of 2012 is filed, to call for the records pertains to G.O.(d).No.159 dated 16.04.2012 passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same.
1.1. The Writ Petition in W.P.No.11245 of 2012 is filed, challenging the Government Order passed in G.O.Ms.No.89, Commercial Tax and Registration Department dated 21.07.2011 and the consequential guidelines issued by the second respondent in proceedings dated 09.01.2012.
1.2 The Writ Petition in W.P.No.30185 of 2012 is filed to quash the Government order passed in G.O.Ms.No.474 dated 30.10.2012.
1.3 The Writ Petition in W.P.No.28505 of 2013 is filed, to quash the impugned order in G.O.Ms.No.557 dated 10.10.2013 passed by the second respondent and further, direct the respondents 1 and 2 to grant exemption to the Petitioner's Movie under the Tamil Nadu Entertainment Tax Act.
1.4 The Writ Petition in W.P.No.6985 of 2014 is filed, challenging the Government Order passed in G.O.(D).No.90 dated 26.02.2014 passed by the 2nd respondent in respect of the date of grant of exemption under Tamil Nadu Entertainment Tax Act from 26.02.2014 and direct the 2nd respondent to grant exemption from 14.02.2014 to 25.02.2014.
1.5 The last Writ Petition in W.P.No.12050 of 2014 is filed to quash the Government Order passed in G.O.No.002 dated 03.01.2012 passed by the second respondent in so far as the appointment of the respondents 3 to 9 is concerned and consequently, direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to constitute a new committee to view and recommend films for grant of exemption to entertainment tax.
2. The petitioner is a Firm, involved in the production and distribution of films mainly in the State of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner states that it has produced about eight movies and distributed several other movies throughout India. The Government of Tamil Nadu under the Tamil Nadu Entertainments Tax Act, 1939, granted exemption from payment of entertainment tax for the movies having their title in Tamil by passing the Government Order bearing G.O.Ms.No.72 dated 22.07.2006. The said Government Order was followed with another Government Order bearing G.O.Ms.No.89, dated 21.07.2011, wherein certain additional conditions are imposed for grant of exemption from payment of Entertainment tax under the Tamil Nadu Entertainments Tax Act, 1939. The guidelines/conditions for grant of exemption under the Government order are issued by the first respondent/Commissioner of Commercial Tax Department in proceedings dated 09.01.2012.
3. The Government issued orders in G.O.No.002 dated 03.01.2012, constituting a committee comprising of persons as official members and other persons as ex-officio members to the said committee. The said committee constituted to view and assess the movies in respect of the applications submitted by the producers / distributors for grant of exemption under the Tamil Nadu Entertainments Tax Act, 1939.
4. The petitioner submitted an application for exemption before the first respondent on 30.01.2014 for their movie namely 'Idhu Kathirvelan Kadhal'. After the film was certified by the Film Censor Board, the first respondent refused to give any acknowledgement of receipt of the application even though the application was submitted on 30.01.2014. The first respondent is required to nominate a committee, which is to view the movie and recommend, if the same is eligible for exemption under the Tamil Nadu Entertainments Tax Act or not. The petitioner was forced to file a writ petition in W.P.No.3203 of 2014.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated that whenever the petitioner approaches the respondents, seeking exemption regarding their movies, there is an apparent discrimination and thus, the very constitution of the Committee is not in accordance with the purpose and object for grant of exemption from payment of Entertainment Tax.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the first and second respondents are constantly discriminating the peti
SupremeToday
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
