EAST INDIA HOTELS LTD. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE interesting question that arises in this writ petition is this: Is the proprietor of a discotheque liable to pay duty under the provisions of the Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, 1923?

(2.) THE petitioners own a hotel in Bombay known as 'Oberoi Towers'. Since 1975 they conduct in the hotel a club called 'The Cellar'. The club is a discotheque where music is piped and a dance floor is provided for those who wish to dance. There is seating accommodation and drinks and snacks can be purchased. The music is suitable for what is described as modern dancing. Entrance to the club is restricted to its members and their guests and to the residents of the hotel.

(3.) IT was submitted by Mr. Vahanvati, learned Counsel for the petitioners, that there was no entertainment in a discotheque because there was no exhibition or performance or amusement. As he put it, in order to constitute 'entertainment', there had to be a show or something objective outside the person amused or entertained. There was a distinction between providing entertainment and the facilities for entertainment. The definition of 'entertainment' in the Act and its scheme postulated the holding or organising of the entertainment.