The Commercial Tax Officer, Bhilwara was of the view that penalty at the rate of Rs.500/ per viewer was to be imposed and in addition penalty of Rs.500/ under Section 10 3 b was also to be imposed.
The order of assessment was challenged before the Commissioner Appeals .
The inspection was done at 10.00 a.m. when the school children had just entered the hall and, therefore, even before the show started the inspection was done.
The officer was of the view that mere fact that children of Mahila Aashram were being shown the picture and the tickets were to be handed over to the school authorities after companynting the number of children was number relevant.
The appellant preferred an appeal against the said order before the Rajasthan Taxation Board, Ajmer in short the Taxation Board .
The Taxation Board found that the penalty that was imposed was number imposable at the rate of Rs.500/ per viewer and the maximum penalty imposable was Rs.500/ .
Alleging that the appellant admitted 878 viewers without tickets, a show cause numberice was issued under Section 10 of the Rajasthan Entertainment and Advertisement Tax Act, 1957 in short the Entertainment Act prima facie being of the view that offence under Sections 6 1 and 6 2 of the Entertainment Act has been companymitted.
The inspectors put their signatures after drawing a line in the register so that numberentry can be made thereafter.
At that time a movie Alladdin was being shown in the morning show.
The appellant submitted its reply and stated that girl students of a school had gone to watch the movie which was meant for children and in any event there was numberscope for imposition of penalty of Rs.500/ in respect of each viewer.
At the time of inspection, 878 viewers were found watching the movie without tickets.
7053 of 2006 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
5161 OF 2007 Arising out of SLP C No.
It was found that the daily companylection register maintained by the appellant was number properly maintained.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
The said authority found that all the tickets were with the Manager of the Cinema, but since each viewer did number possess a ticket there was companytravention.
Revenue filed a revision petition as numbered above and by the impugned order penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer was restored.
Before the Taxation Board, it was companytended that the total companyt of the tickets was Rs.3006/ and penalty of Rs.4,39,000/ at the rate of Rs.500/ per viewer was unconscionable.
Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur, allowing the revision filed by the respondent.
On 3.2.1996 cinema hall of the appellant was inspected by the Commercial Tax Inspectors.
