Back
PANKAJ BHATIA
Anandi Water Park Resorts and Club Pvt. Ltd. , Thru. Dir. Amit – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. , Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Commercial and Entertainment – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Aditya Tewari, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Kumar Shukla, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 31.08.2010 whereby the entertainment tax of Rs.3,17,378.04/- was imposed in exercise of powers conferred under Section 12 of The Uttar Pradesh Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as "The 1979 Act") along with penalty of Rs.20,000/-. The petitioner also challenges the order dated 21.01.2016 whereby the statutory appeal preferred by him was rejected as well as the order dated 30.03.2017 whereby the application for recall of the appellate order was also rejected.
3. The facts in brief are that the petitioner is a Company incorporated under The Companies Act, 1956 and is a Proprietor of a water park situate at Faizabad Road, Lucknow and runs a water park in the said premises in accordance with the permission obtained from the requisite authorities.
4. The contention of the Counsel for the petitioner is that the entertainment tax levied on the water park was exempted vide order dated 22.05.1998, however, the said issue need not detain us as the i
The judgment established the applicability of entertainment tax based on the nature of the activities and the public's access to them, as interpreted in various decisions.
The definitions of 'entertainment' and 'payment for admission' under the Maharashtra Entertainments Duty Act are broad enough to encompass award functions and sponsorship amounts, while penalties mus....
Entertainment tax subsidies granted as incentives for constructing cinema infrastructure are capital receipts and do not reduce the cost of assets for depreciation purposess, provided they are not li....
Local authorities must comply with government exemption orders under the Kerala Local Authorities Entertainments Tax Act, and cannot impose additional conditions for tax refunds.
State legislative competence prevails over Union taxation on amusement activities per Entries 62 and 97 of List I and II of the Constitution; imposition of service tax deemed unconstitutional.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioners' water sports activities were liable for entertainment duty under the Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, and their claim for refun....
The charge for admission must be uniformly and mandatorily applicable to all attendees to constitute 'payment for admission' under the relevant legal provisions.
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
