9911796707
TMI Blog1959 (1) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ws of the members of the court as to the serious consequences of excessive taxation to lead to a conclusion that the law is 'ultra vires'. Moreover, this is a point which was never urged before the High Court and no evidence was led in support of it and in the circumstances the appellants cannot be permitted to raise this new point at this final stage. Appeal dismissed. - Appeal (civil) 280 of 1956 - - - Dated:- 16-1-1959 - S.R. DAS, S.K. DAS, P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K.N. WANCHOO AND M HIDAYATULLAH, JJ. JUDGMENT These eight appeals arise out of eight writ petitions filed by the appellants in the High Court of Mysore challenging the validity of the Mysore Cinematograph Shows Tax Act of 1951 (Mysore Act XVI of 1951) and praying for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondents, is a law with respect to matters enumerated in entry 62 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution which runs as follows : Taxes on luxuries including taxes on entertainments, amusements, betting and gambling which corresponds to entry 50 in List II to the Seventh Schedule to the Government of India Act, 1935. Learned counsel for the appellants, on the other hand, contends that this Act is clearly a law made with respect to matters enumerated in entry 60 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution which reads thus : Taxes on professions, trades, callings and employments . The argument is that that being the true position, the amount of tax cannot exceed the amount permitted by Art. 276 (2) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to enact a law imposing a tax on theatres or dramatic performances or sports, for none of those words are mentioned in entry 62. This is sufficient to repel this argument. The truth of the matter is that cinema had to be specifically mentioned in entry 33 of List II in order to avoid any possible conflict between it and entry 60 in List I. 4. The only other argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellants is that even if the tax comes under entry 62, its quantum is so large that it destroys the appellants' business and he has referred us to the decision of the Judicial Committee in Attorney General of Alberta v. Attorney General of Canada, 1939 AIR(PC) 53. This is a point which necessarily involves an investigation into ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
