<?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>1982 (2) TMI 317 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182012</link>
    <description>Entertainment duty under the Act applies only where the proprietor provides an objective amusement or gratification to the visitor, as understood in the context of Entry 62 of List II of the Seventh Schedule. Amounts inserted in slot-operated video game machines were held not to be payment for admission to an entertainment, because the visitor derived no amusement merely from entering the premises or inserting a coin; the thrill arose from the player&#039;s own skill-based operation of the machine. The payment was therefore for access to the equipment enabling self-performance, not for admission to an entertainment supplied by the proprietor, and no entertainment duty was payable under Section 3.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 16:41:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=426076" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (2) TMI 317 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182012</link>
      <description>Entertainment duty under the Act applies only where the proprietor provides an objective amusement or gratification to the visitor, as understood in the context of Entry 62 of List II of the Seventh Schedule. Amounts inserted in slot-operated video game machines were held not to be payment for admission to an entertainment, because the visitor derived no amusement merely from entering the premises or inserting a coin; the thrill arose from the player&#039;s own skill-based operation of the machine. The payment was therefore for access to the equipment enabling self-performance, not for admission to an entertainment supplied by the proprietor, and no entertainment duty was payable under Section 3.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182012</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>