https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156697 Sections 4 and 4-A of the Karnataka Entertainments Tax Act were upheld because the fiscal classification had a rational nexus with the object of the levy and did not amount to hostile or unreasonable discrimination under Article 14. Concessions for Kannada, Kodava, Konkani and Tulu films were treated as protective discrimination supporting regional cultural development, not as arbitrariness. The levy also did not attract Article 304(b), since the entertainment tax and the preference for regional films did not create a direct trade barrier or require Presidential assent. Section 4-A was further sustained as a workable optional composition scheme based on gross collection capacity, with no constitutional infirmity in its valuation method. en-us Thu, 04 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Sep 2013 17:07:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156697 Sections 4 and 4-A of the Karnataka Entertainments Tax Act were upheld because the fiscal classification had a rational nexus with the object of the levy and did not amount to hostile or unreasonable discrimination under Article 14. Concessions for Kannada, Kodava, Konkani and Tulu films were treated as protective discrimination supporting regional cultural development, not as arbitrariness. The levy also did not attract Article 304(b), since the entertainment tax and the preference for regional films did not create a direct trade barrier or require Presidential assent. Section 4-A was further sustained as a workable optional composition scheme based on gross collection capacity, with no constitutional infirmity in its valuation method. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 04 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156697