<?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>2013 (4) TMI 457 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=226227</link>
    <description>An inclusive taxing definition of &quot;entertainment&quot; can extend beyond its ordinary meaning where the statute expressly covers exhibitions admitted for payment. Applying that approach, trade exhibitions with public character, registration charges, and monetary benefit to the organiser and exhibitors were treated as exhibitions open for consideration and therefore within the levy under the Bombay Entertainments Duty Act. The absence of musical performance, ramp shows, or other conventional amusement features was not decisive, and the textile-dome distinction was treated as fact-specific and inapplicable. The exhibitions were held exigible to entertainment duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2014 14:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195610" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 457 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=226227</link>
      <description>An inclusive taxing definition of &quot;entertainment&quot; can extend beyond its ordinary meaning where the statute expressly covers exhibitions admitted for payment. Applying that approach, trade exhibitions with public character, registration charges, and monetary benefit to the organiser and exhibitors were treated as exhibitions open for consideration and therefore within the levy under the Bombay Entertainments Duty Act. The absence of musical performance, ramp shows, or other conventional amusement features was not decisive, and the textile-dome distinction was treated as fact-specific and inapplicable. The exhibitions were held exigible to entertainment duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=226227</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>