<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2005 (3) TMI 438 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105499</link>
    <description>Entertainment tax under the West Bengal Entertainment-cum-Amusement Tax Act, 1982 was upheld as a valid levy within the State&#039;s legislative competence under Entry 62 of List II, because the tax was directed at the person effectively offering or providing entertainment and had a direct, proximate nexus with the viewing of television signals. The cable television regulatory law was treated as operating in a different field and not limiting the State&#039;s taxing power. Multi-system operators transmitting signals through sub-cable operators were treated as cable operators for the State Act, because they received, arranged, and transmitted the signals for immediate exhibition to subscribers, making them liable to pay the tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2015 12:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142537" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 438 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105499</link>
      <description>Entertainment tax under the West Bengal Entertainment-cum-Amusement Tax Act, 1982 was upheld as a valid levy within the State&#039;s legislative competence under Entry 62 of List II, because the tax was directed at the person effectively offering or providing entertainment and had a direct, proximate nexus with the viewing of television signals. The cable television regulatory law was treated as operating in a different field and not limiting the State&#039;s taxing power. Multi-system operators transmitting signals through sub-cable operators were treated as cable operators for the State Act, because they received, arranged, and transmitted the signals for immediate exhibition to subscribers, making them liable to pay the tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105499</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>