Entertainment duty on club billiards tables fails where access is limited to members and no separate payment is charged.

Entertainment duty under the Maharashtra Entertainments Duty Act is attracted only where persons are admitted for payment to the activity itself. The text explains that the statutory definitions of entertainment, pool-game and pool parlour, read with the charging and levy provisions, did not cover billiards tables confined to a members' club. Because the facility was limited to members, their guests and service members, was not open to the public even on payment, and carried no separate charge for use of the tables, the required elements of public colour and benefit in money were not met. On that basis, the duty demand was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether entertainment duty could be levied on billiards tables provided by a members' club under the Maharashtra Entertainments Duty Act when the facility was not to the public and no separate payment was made for use of the tables.

Analysis: The definitions of entertainment, pool-game and pool parlour under Sections 2(a), 2(b-1) and 2(b-2), read with the charging provision in Section 3 and the levy mechanism in Section 4, require that the entertainment be one to which persons are admitted for payment. The facility in question was confined to the club's members, their guests and service members, was not open to the public even on payment, and was not shown to be separately charged for use of the billiards tables. The tests of public colour and benefit in money, applied in the governing precedent on what constitutes entertainment, were not satisfied.

Conclusion: Entertainment duty was not leviable on the billiards tables, and the demand notices were unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: A recreational facility confined to members of a club, not open to the public and not involving admission for payment in relation to the activity itself, does not constitute entertainment exigible to duty under the Act.

---