RAVI TALKIES Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are four applications under Article 226 of the Constitution raising an important question relating to the Constitution of the Orissa Entertainments Tax Act, 1946 (Act V of 1946 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The facts giving rise to these writ petitions are, for all practical purposes, identical barring only the difference in the amounts of entertainment tax demanded and the periods for which they are so demanded. The Petitioner is common to all the four cases being the proprietor of a Cinema bearing the name ''Ravi Talkies '' at Bhubaneswar. The grievance of the Petitioner relates to the excess entertainment tax demanded from him for four different periods as detailed hereunder. O.J.C. 59 69 relates to the period 1 -9 -1965 to 31 -3 -1966; O.J.C. 60 69 relates to the period 1 -4 -1966 to 31 -3 -1967; O.J.C. 61 69 relates to the period 1 -4 -1967 to 31 -3 -1968; and O.J.C. 62 69 relates to the period 1 -4 -1968 to 30 -9 -1968.

(2.) THE Petitioner commenced his business on 1 -9 -1965. He intimated to the Commercial Tax Officer, Khurdha who then had jurisdiction over Bhubaneswar the different rates of admission and the tax he was going to charge thereon. None of the opposite parties pointed out to him at any time that the rates so intimated were not in accordance with law. He was depositing in advance the entertainment taxes due on the tickets issued by him. On 5 -11 -1968, the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, Bhubaneswar (Opposite Party No. 4) issued a notice to the Petitioner asking the latter to produce his books of accounts by 8 -11 -1968 (Vide Annexure IV). On 6 -11 -1968, the Additional Commercial Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, Bhubaneswar (Opposite Party No. 3) wrote to the Petitioner (Annexure -V) stating that the entertainment tax collected by the latter was not proper and was not in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of the Act and directed him to collect the tax in accordance with the rates mentioned in the letter. Referring to his letter, the Petitioner submitted (Annexure -VI) that ever since he started the business he had been collecting taxes at rates approved by the then Commercial Tax Officer, and asked for certain clarification as to why an objection was being taken regarding the correctness of the rates. With reference to Annexure - VI, the Additional Commercial Tax Officer asked the Petitioner to appear before him on 19 -11 -1968 to obtain clarification regarding the basis of collecting entertainment tax (Annexure -VII). But meanwhile, the Commercial Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, Bhubaneswar (Opposite Party No. 2) passed the impugned order dated 8 -11 -1968 (Annexure -VIII) assessing the Petitioner to excess tax for the periods above -mentioned. The excess taxes charged are Rs. 1429.08 p.; Rs. 5,669.81p.; Rs. 5,957.22p.; and Rs. 3,436.96p respectively for the periods 1 -9 -1965 to 31 -3 -1966, 1 -4 -1966 to 31 -3 -1967, 1 -4 -1967 to 31 -3 -1968, and 1 -4 -1968 to 30 -9 -1968. Being aggrieved by the orders of assessment, the Petitioner has in these writ applications challenged the levy inter alia on the following grounds:

(3.) TO understand the various contentions raised by the parties it is necessary to make a brief reference to the scheme of the Act. Section 3 of the Act defines certain expressions. Sub -section (7) thereof gives an inclusive definition of ''payment for admission '' in the following terms: