https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286288 Bombay HC construed the amusement park entertainments duty scheme on its plain language and held that amusement parks were entitled to the concessional mechanism because no exclusion was expressed in the charging provisions. Reading the relevant sections together, it held that duty was nil for the first three years, 3.75% for the 4th and 5th years, and 7.5% from the 6th year onwards. On refund or adjustment of excess duty, the Court held that the proprietor had to prove that the duty burden had not been passed on and that unjust enrichment had not occurred before retaining the benefit of refund. en-us Tue, 19 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Feb 2020 16:49:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286288 Bombay HC construed the amusement park entertainments duty scheme on its plain language and held that amusement parks were entitled to the concessional mechanism because no exclusion was expressed in the charging provisions. Reading the relevant sections together, it held that duty was nil for the first three years, 3.75% for the 4th and 5th years, and 7.5% from the 6th year onwards. On refund or adjustment of excess duty, the Court held that the proprietor had to prove that the duty burden had not been passed on and that unjust enrichment had not occurred before retaining the benefit of refund. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 19 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286288