Search Results for "Karnataka Entertainment Tax Act"

30 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 30 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

"Supreme Court of India Resolves Complexities in Taxation of Mineral Rights" "Judgment Clarifies Legislative Powers and the Nature of Royalty in Mining Sector"

The Supreme Court of India addressed a significant dispute regarding the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States, specific...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeals by States of Karnataka and Kerala in Lottery Tax Dispute — State Legislatures Have Competence to Tax Lotteries Under Entry 62 List II. Regulatory Entry 40 List I Does Not Bar State Taxation of Lotteries Organised by Other States.

The Supreme Court considered appeals by the States of Karnataka and Kerala against judgments of their respective High Courts which had struck down sta...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Against Entertainment Tax Imposition on Fashion Week Event. Petitioner failed to avail alternative remedy and did not cooperate with assessment proceedings under Karnataka Entertainment Tax Act, 1958.

The petitioner, M/s. Dream Merchants Events and Entertainment Groups, organized a 'Bangalore Fashion Week' event on 03.02.2012 at Hotel Crown Plaza. T...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Upholds SC/ST Reservation in Excise Licenses — CL-7D Rules Valid. Amendment to Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquor) Rules, 1968 providing concessional licenses to SC/ST hotel owners is not arbitrary or unconstitutional.

The petitioner, B Govindraj Hegde, Secretary of the Federation of Wine Merchants Association, Karnataka, challenged the vires of the Karnataka Excise ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Entertainment Duty on Amusement Park Admission Fee. Lumpsum Charge for Entry and Entertainment is Subject to Duty Under Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, 1923.

The petitioners, Pan India Paryatan Limited and its director, owned and operated an amusement park in Greater Bombay which opened to the public on 25t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Time Limit for Availing Input Tax Credit Under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. The court held that the time limit is mandatory and not directory, and retrospective amendments are valid.

The Bombay High Court, in a batch of writ petitions, addressed the constitutional validity and interpretation of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods an...