TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1959 (1) TMI 23
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing the appellant's suit against the respondent with costs throughout. This appeal has been filed under a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Bombay. The facts leading up to this appeal may shortly be stated. The appellant is a public limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. It is a lessee of two cinema Houses known respectively as " West End " and " Capitol " situated within the limits of Poona cantonment area. It exhibits in the said two Houses cinematograph films, both foreign and Indian. On March 20, 1947, a notice was issued by the respondent whereby, in exercise of the powers conferred on it by s. 60 of the Cantonments Act, 1924 (11 of 1924), the respondent proposed to make, with the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notification was issued by the Government of Bombay to the effect that in supersession of the notifications of Government noted on the margin and of all other notifications on the same subject, the Governor in Council, with the previous sanction of the Governor General-in-Council was pleased to impose certain taxes in the Cantonment of Poona with effect from July 15, 1948. One of the taxes thus imposed was as follows:" V Tax on entertainments. 1. Cinemas, Talkies or dramas Rs. 10.0-0 :in the case of the West End per show and Capitol In other cases Rs. 5-0-0 per show 2. Circus Rs. 2-0-0 per show 3. Horse Races meetings. Rs. 100-0-0 per day of race 4. Amusement park Rs. 20-0-0 per day." &nbs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... imposed under this section shall take effect from the date of its notification in the official gazette ". The enactment under which shortly after the date of passing of the Cantonments Act, 1924, tax could be imposed by the municipal boroughs in the province of Bombay was the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act, 1925 (Bom. XVIII of 1925). Therefore the powers of the respondent to. levy and collect taxes under the provisions of the Cantonments Act were coextensive with the powers of the Borough Municipalities under the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act, 1925. Section 73 of the last mentioned Act specified the taxes which might be imposed by a municipality. The relevant portions thereof, prior to its present adaptation, were as follows:" Subject to an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... matters specified in entry 46, namely, taxes on professions, trades, callings and employments and, therefore, cannot exceed Rs. 100 per annum under s. 142A of the Government of India Act, 1935 and Rs. 250 per annum under Art. 276(2) of the Constitution. We are unable to accept this argument as sound. As pointed out by this' Court in Navinchandra Mafatlal v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City ([1955] 1 S.C.R. 829), following certain earlier decisions referred to therein, the entries in the legislative list should not be read in a narrow or restricted sense and that each general word should be held to extend to all ancillary or subsidiary matters which can fairly and reasonably be said to be comprehended in it. It has been ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the privilege of carrying on any trade or calling. It is a tax imposed on every show, that is to say, on every instance of the exercise of the particular trade, calling or employment. If there is no show, there is no tax. A lawyer has to pay a tax or fee to take out a license irrespective of whether or not he actually practises. That tax is a tax for the privilege of having the right to exercise the profession if and when the person taking out the license chooses to do so. The impugned tax is a tax on the act of entertainment resulting in a show. In our opinion, therefore, s. 73 is a law with respect to matters enumerated in entry 50 and not entry 46 and the Bombay legislature had ample power to enact this law. The only other point urged....