TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 156
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment tax claimed in terms of S.O. No. 138 dated 22.7.2009 published in the State Gazette. 3. By the said Gazette Notification bearing S.O. No. 138 dated 22.7.2009 issued in exercise of power under sub-Section (2) of Section 10 of the Bihar Entertainment Tax Act, 1948 the running and closed cinema houses were exempted on upgradation and modernization for a period of two years or recovery of 75% of their capital investment, whichever was earlier, from the date of receipt of the application in that behalf. For the said purpose different places in the State were classified into four categories and different exemption limits were prescribed therein. A Committee of three Officers consisting of the District Magistrate, Executive Engineer and conc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rportedly of 11.10.2010 was also given to the District Magistrate stating the same facts on 11.10.2010. Another letter was finally given to the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, East Circle, Patna City on 11.10.2010 for which receipt was given and in which it is stated that since 20.9.2010 the work of painting was going on. Thereafter the petitioner on 29.11.2010 submitted a letter giving details of expenditure of Rs. 7,89,121/- for the purpose of upgradation and modernization and made a prayer for the amount being adjusted from the entertainment tax after making the necessary inspection, which was received in the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes on 30.11.2010. The petitioner was subsequently served a notice dated 15....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r stated therein that in the said Picture Palace painting, sound, change of curtain and cleaning works were going on, as a result of which the exhibition of films had been stopped with respect to which information had been given on 15.5.2010 itself. It is thus submitted by learned counsel for the State that it is evident from the said letter dated 11.6.2010 of the petitioner herself that the work of painting, etc. had been started by the petitioner since 15.5.2010 with due intimation to the respondents and the subsequent letter dated 13.8.2010 was a mere after-thought, probably after learning about the Gazette Notification dated 22.7.2009 in order to derive the benefit under the said notification, which is not permissible as the work can on....