TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 394
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated 30.10.2012. 1.3 The Writ Petition in W.P.No.28505 of 2013 is filed, to quash the impugned order in G.O.Ms.No.557 dated 10.10.2013 passed by the second respondent and further, direct the respondents 1 and 2 to grant exemption to the Petitioner's Movie under the Tamil Nadu Entertainment Tax Act. 1.4 The Writ Petition in W.P.No.6985 of 2014 is filed, challenging the Government Order passed in G.O.(D).No.90 dated 26.02.2014 passed by the 2nd respondent in respect of the date of grant of exemption under Tamil Nadu Entertainment Tax Act from 26.02.2014 and direct the 2nd respondent to grant exemption from 14.02.2014 to 25.02.2014. 1.5 The last Writ Petition in W.P.No.12050 of 2014 is filed to quash the Government Order passed in G.O.No.002 dated 03.01.2012 passed by the second respondent in so far as the appointment of the respondents 3 to 9 is concerned and consequently, direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to constitute a new committee to view and recommend films for grant of exemption to entertainment tax. 2. The petitioner is a Firm, involved in the production and distribution of films mainly in the State of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner states that it has produced about eigh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etitioner company, who is the son of Mr.M.K.Stalin, the DMK Party Treasurer and Former Deputy Chief Minister of Government of Tamil Nadu, presently, the Hon'ble Chief Minster of Tamil Nadu. For all the movies produced and distributed by the petitioner, Entertainment Tax Exemption was denied on non existent grounds. Thus, the petitioners were forced to approach this Hon'ble Court by filing several writ petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.11244, 11245 of 2012 in respect of the Movie 'Oru Kal Oru Kannadi'; W.P.No.30185 of 2012 in respect of the Movie 'Neer Paravai'; W.P.No.28505 of 2013 for the Movie 'Vanakkam Chennai'; W.P.No.11245 of 2012, the petitioner has challenged G.O.No.89 dated 21.07.2011 and the consequential proceedings issued in G.O.No.2 dated 09.01.2012. The petitioner also challenged the rule making power of the respondents to pass the above referred G.O in W.P.No.30808 of 2013. 7. The respondents refused to constitute a Committee in respect of the movie 'Oru Kal Oru Kannadi', which was produced by the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner approached this Hon'ble Court by way of a writ petition in W.P.No.10211 of 2012. Pursuant to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on had not been followed. The Committee has taken unilateral decisions and further, exemptions are granted in a whimsical manner without considering the guidelines issued by the Government. Thus, the entire exercise of the Committee for grant of exemption is perverse and tainted with malafides. Under those circumstances, the writ petitioner was forced to file writ petition, challenging the constitution of Committee itself. However, the fact remains that all these incidences occurred long before right from the year 2012 to 2014 and under these circumstances, this Court directed the learned counsel for the respondents to submit the recommendations of the Committee pursuant to the application submitted by the petitioner for granting exemption to their movie namely 'Oru Kal Oru Kannadi'. Pursuant to the directions, the learned counsel produced the recommendations of the Committee. The recommendations of the committee as far as the movie 'Oru Kal Oru Kannadi' is concerned, the Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department in his letter dated 16.04.2012 sent a report to the Secretary to Government, Commercial Tax and Registration Department, Chennai - 9. 11. As far as the mov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r having close affinity with the party leaders. 15. The petitioners have raised an allegation that in some of their movies, Mr.Udhayanidhi Stalin, Son of Mr.M.K.Stalin, is an Actor and this is also one of the reason for rejecting the application filed by the petitioners, seeking exemption from payment of Entertainment Tax. 16. In respect of the said allegations, the opinion formed by the petitioners cannot be brushed aside as there is some substance. However, this is the unfortunate situation in our great Nation, wherein people holding responsible public posts are acting with the evil elements of Favouritism and Nepotism. Favouritism, Nepotism and corrupt activities are anti-developmental, anti-national and unconstitutional. Such evil elements are not only creating trouble in the mind of the Court, but it will have greater impact for upholding the constitutional mandate of social justice. One can imagine if Favouritism, Nepotism and corrupt activities are allowed to go on to such an extent, the common man will suffer and we will not march towards the goal of social justice as enunciated in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. Therefore, appointment of women and men of integ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in the event of any violation, illegality or unconstitutionality is identified, the Government of the day must act with iron hand and no such person whatsoever high he may be, cannot be shown any leniency or misplaced sympathy in order to achieve the goal of social justice and equality. 22. Our Constitution has noble ideas and principles. Undoubtedly, we are thriving hard to achieve those goals. However, conviction of mind in the matters of upholding the institutional values and strength are of vital. Thus, the mechanism of control must be far more transparent than that of the system prevailing now. Unless effective steps are taken, the constitutional mandate of effective public administration cannot be provided to the citizen of this great Nation. Thus, this Court has no contrary opinion regarding judicial restraint to be exercised in administrative policies. However, the Courts are bound to express its anguish regarding the happenings in the public Administrations. That exactly is the reason why there is a clash between judicial restraint and judicial activism. Undoubtedly, the Court cannot run the Government. However, the High Court has got a constitutional duty to protect th....