Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a cinema proprietor who had opted for composition of entertainment tax under section 6(3) could be denied rebate or proportionate relief for the period during which the last show was not exhibited pursuant to a lawful closure order and no admission tax was collected.
Analysis: The composition amount was fixed for the year under the statutory scheme, but the material fact remained that the cinema was compelled by a lawful order to discontinue the last show for the relevant period. During that period there was no exhibition, no sale of tickets, and consequently no collection of entertainment tax. A rigid application of the circular insisting on closure for 30 days or more was held to be irrational in the peculiar facts, because the proprietor could not be made to pay tax for a period when the entertainment itself could not lawfully be carried on. The Court treated the petitioner's non-exhibition of the show as involuntary compliance with a lawful administrative order rather than a voluntary closure attracting the restrictive condition in the circular.
Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to relief for the period during which the cinema remained closed for the last show, and the demand raised for that period was unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Where entertainment tax is compounded under a statutory scheme, no demand can be sustained for a period in which the cinema is lawfully prevented from exhibiting shows and no admission tax is collected, if the closure is involuntary and attributable to a lawful authority's order.