<?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>2015 (4) TMI 608 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258726</link>
    <description>Entertainment tax could not be levied on tickets bearing face value below the statutory threshold where the charging provision applied only to admissions with payment, excluding tax, of at least Rs. 50. The Karnataka HC noted that Section 3(2) on complimentary tickets did not permit re-fixing the value of regular tickets merely because holders received facilities similar to higher-priced tickets or because the arrangement was structured to reduce tax exposure. As the relevant tickets were stamped at Rs. 25 and Rs. 49, the statute then in force did not authorise treating them as taxable at a higher value. The deletion of tax and consequential penalty was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=382244" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 608 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258726</link>
      <description>Entertainment tax could not be levied on tickets bearing face value below the statutory threshold where the charging provision applied only to admissions with payment, excluding tax, of at least Rs. 50. The Karnataka HC noted that Section 3(2) on complimentary tickets did not permit re-fixing the value of regular tickets merely because holders received facilities similar to higher-priced tickets or because the arrangement was structured to reduce tax exposure. As the relevant tickets were stamped at Rs. 25 and Rs. 49, the statute then in force did not authorise treating them as taxable at a higher value. The deletion of tax and consequential penalty was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>