TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1966 (11) TMI 92
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. Nos. 693 to 696 and 771 of 1962 and 57 of 1963 and 99 of 1964, G.M. Vidyarthi, Asst. Govt. Pleader and K.L. Talsania, Addl. Govt. Pleader JUDGMENT P.N. Bhagwati, J. (1) A short question of considerable importance relating to the construction of the Bombay Entertainments Duty Act, 1923, arises in the present petitions. The petitions are twelve in number and the facts giving rise to the petitions are only the difference in the amounts of entertainments duty demanded by the Collector and the periods for which they are so demanded. It will, therefore, be sufficient to state the facts of petition No. 595 of 1962 in so far as they bear upon the question in controversy in the present petitions. The petitioners are proprietors of a Cinema Theatre in the town of Junagarh and they trues at the said theatre. Prior to 30th April 1960 the entertainments duty was charged by applying the statutory percentage to the total amount received by the petitioners from the cinema-goers both in respect of admission to the cinema theatre as also on account of entertainments duty. As a result of a circular issued by the Collector was levied from and after 30th April 1960 by applying the statutory....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent and the exhibition of motion pictures in the cinema theatres of the petitioners was admittedly an entertainment within the meaning of this definition. Section 2 clause (b) gives an inclusive definition of "payment for admission" in the following terms:- "(b) 'Payment for admission includes- (i) any payment made by a person who, having been admitted to one part of a place of entertainment, is subsequently admitted to another part thereof for admission to which a payment involving duty or Proprietor more duty is required. (ii) any payment for seats or other accommodation in a place of entertainment, (iii) any payment for a programmed of synopsis of an entertainment, (iii-a) any payment made for the loan or use of any instrument or contrivance which enables a person to get a normal or better view or hearing of the entertainment which, without the aid of such instrument or contrivance, such person would not get: and (iv) any payment for any purpose whatsoever connected with an entertainment which a person is required to make as a condition of attending or continuing to attend the entertainment in addition to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be levied and paid to the State Government on every complimentary ticket issued by the proprietor the entertainment duty at the appropriate rate prescribed under Section 3, as if full payment had been made for admission to the entertainment according to the class of seat or accommodation which the holder of such ticket is entitled to occupy or use and the holder of such ticket shall or deemed to have been admitted for payment for the purposes of the Act. The method of levying the entertainments duty is prescribed by Section 4 and that section provides. "4 (1) Save as otherwise provided by this Act, no person other than a person who has to perform some duty in connection with him by any law, shall be admitted to any entertainment, except, with a ticked stamped with an impressed embossed, issued by the State Government for the purposes of revenue and denoting that the proper entertainments duty has been paid. (2) The State Government may, on the application of a proprietor of any entertainment in respect of which the entertainment duty is payable under section 3, allow the proprietor on such conditions as the State Government may prescribe to pay the amount of the duty due- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thin the scope and ambit of the words it governs. All the can possibly be included in them. This word is intended to remove any imitative or restrictive inhibition which might otherwise affect the full and natural content of the words it. Governs and it is, therefore, clear that the Legislature meant to include within the subject matter of the charge all payments for admission and did not intend that any payment for admission should be left out from the charge of the duty. But that raises the question; what is included within the connotation of the expression "payment for admission"? "Payment for admission" is defined in Section 2(b) but that is an inclusive definition and what is set out in the inclusive clause cannot prevent the expression receiving its ordinary popular and natural sense wherever that would be properly applicable. The inclusive definition is given for the purpose of enlarging and not restricting the meaning of "payment for admission" and that which, independently of the inclusive definition, in ordinary language, would properly be regarded as payment for admission does not cease to be so because it does not fall within the inclusive clause. It is, therefore, nece....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hole of it would admittedly be a payment for admission; then on principle why should it make any difference if the price of admission is split up and the amount charged on account of entertainments duty is separately shown. The character of the payment cannot change according as it included as part of the price of admission or is shown as a separate item. If it is payment for admission in the one case, it must be payment for admission in the other. (4) There is also considerable inherent evidence in the Act to support this view. If payment for admission does not include payment of an amount separately charged by the proprietor on account of entertainments duty, there is no reason why the Legislature should have used the expression "... payment excluding the amount of the duty in section 3 as it stood prior to its amendment by Bombay Act 53 of 1956. The expression "....payment excluding the amount of the duty" clearly postulates that the payment for admission would include the amount of the duty and, therefore, for the purpose of applying the statutory percentage as provided in section 3. The payment to be taken into account should be the payment excluding the amount of the duty.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount of entertainments duty would be anything but the price for admission but he urged that when entertainments duty is paid by stamps under Section 4(1), the liability to pay entertainments the proprietor. The proprietor, according to him, is, in such a case, merely an agent of the State for the recovery of entertainments duty from the purchaser and not that of the proprietor. The proprietor, according to him, is, in such a case, merely an abetments duty from the purchase by sale of the stamp to be affixed to the ticked issued for admission to the entertainment. The argument was rested primarily on the construction of Section 4(1) but support for it was also sought to be drawn form some of was also sought to be drawn from some of the rules, particularly rules 3,4 and 13. It is, therefore, necessary to consider the true meaning and effect of section 4 (1) and the relevant rules dealing with payment of duty by stamps. (6) Before, however, we do so, it is necessary to make a few general observations which are helpful in the determinations of the question before us. The entertainments duty which is levied by the Act is a duty on entertainments and it is, therefore, reasonable to as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that no provision of an Act should be read in isolation but that all the provisions of the Act must be read together so as to make a consistent and harmonious enactment of the whole statute. If section 4(1) is read with Ss. 4 that the liability to pay entertainments duty by stamping the ticket is that of the proprietor and this liability is not imposed on to the proprietor to adopt the method of payment of entertainments duty set out in that sub-section in place of the method set out in section 4(1) if the State Government ment permits him to do so on an application made by him in that behalf and this provision clearly shows that the liability to pay entertainments duty, whether by the method set out in section 4(1) or by the method set our in section 4 (2), is that of the proprietor. The provision enacted in section 4 (2) that the State Government may on the application of the proprietor allow him to pay the amount of the duty in one of the three ways specified in the sub-section would be liable to pay the amount of the duty by following the method set out in section 4(1) but be may be allowed by him to pay the duty according to the method cant to note that if the proprietor admi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rules in support of their plea that where the method of payment set out in section 4(!) is followed, the proprietor is acting as agent of the proprietor is acting as agent of the State for the purpose of recovering entertainments duty from the purchaser by selling the stamp to him along with the ticket we will briefly refer to these rules. We may at once point out that the rules relied upon by the petitioners do not support the construction contended for by them and the rules read as a whole clearly them and the rules read as a whole clearly bear out the view which we are taking but bear out the view which we are taking but bear out the view which we are taking but even if the rules purported to throw he incidence of duty on the purchaser and constituted the proprietor agent of the state for the purpose of recovering entertainments duty from the purchaser, they cannot affect the construction of the provisions of the Act and in case of conflict between the Act and the Rules, we must give effect to the Act and ignore the rules But, as pointed out by us above, the rules confirm the view as to the construction of the Act and Rules. We must give effect to the Act and ignore the rules Bu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts duty. In such a case also if the method of payment followed is that set out in section 4(1), the proprietor would have to affix a stamp of the value of the entertainments duty payable on the price of admission. Can it be said in such a case that the purchaser has purchased the stamp and that the payment for admission the price of admission less the value of the stamp? To take once again the illustration given above let us suppose that the composite price of admission charged by the proprietor is Rs. 1.20ps. On this price of admission he would have to affix stamp of the value of ticket stamped with a stamp of this denomination, can it be said that he purchases the payment for admission would be not Rs. 1.20 by is, 96 paise. But in that event the stamp affixable by the proprietor would be for entertainments duty payable on 96 paise and not on Rel. on. . 1.20 ps. The only proper construction of the rules in the context of the provisions of the Act therefore seems to be that the proprietor is required to affix on the ticket stamp of the value of the entertainments duty payable on the price of admission and the price of admission may be a composite amount or it may be an amount char....