<?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>2012 (4) TMI 730 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197073</link>
    <description>Entertainment tax assessment on sponsorship receipts could not be sustained without first examining the sponsorship agreements and the factual nature of the payments; the authority had relied only on the statutory provisions and failed to determine whether the amounts were truly for admission or for sponsorship, so the assessment orders were quashed with liberty to pass fresh orders after hearing the petitioner. The Government&#039;s discretionary decision to grant only partial exemption from entertainment tax was not interfered with because the relevant criteria were considered, the petitioner was heard, and reasons were recorded; the 50% exemption order was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Dec 2017 10:48:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501158" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 730 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197073</link>
      <description>Entertainment tax assessment on sponsorship receipts could not be sustained without first examining the sponsorship agreements and the factual nature of the payments; the authority had relied only on the statutory provisions and failed to determine whether the amounts were truly for admission or for sponsorship, so the assessment orders were quashed with liberty to pass fresh orders after hearing the petitioner. The Government&#039;s discretionary decision to grant only partial exemption from entertainment tax was not interfered with because the relevant criteria were considered, the petitioner was heard, and reasons were recorded; the 50% exemption order was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197073</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>