Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1998 (3) TMI 153

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he order of the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi. 2.The short and relevant facts are that the first respondent/writ petitioner has produced a feature film under the title "Adavi Manushulu" in Telegu and that thereafter "Purana Purush" in Hindi, "Kattu Manidhan" in Tamil and "Silayugathil Sundarigal" in Malayalam were made based on the original Telegu film "Adavi Manushulu". From the order of the Tribunal below, it could be seen, while extracting paragraphs 13 and 14 of the Order of the Collector of Central Excise, Madras, as to what transpired in the preparation and making of the films and the method adopted in making such films. It appears that all the 55 prints in question of the feature film have been taken from one master .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... opposed the claim of the Department. But, the Collector of Central Excise overruling the objections confirmed the proposals contained in the show cause notice. 3.Aggrieved, the first respondent moved the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi. The Board by its order dated 3-1-1981 accepted the reasoning of the first respondent and its claim for exemption, since it appears to the Board that language-wise, the film was different from the other not only in title but also in regard to the language in which the introductory portion of speech was covered and also for the further fact that separate censor certificates have been obtained for each of the language film and consequently allowed the appeal. Aggrieved, the Collector of Central .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng statute, the same has to be liberally construed in favour of the citizen and allowed the writ petition by quashing the order of the Tribunal and directed restoration of the order of the Board sustaining the claim of the first respondent for exemption as availed of by it. 5.Mr. K. Jayachandran, learned Counsel for the appellant strenuously and with great force, contended that the order of the learned Single Judge does not conform to the very object and claim underlying the exemption notification, that since the language media has been dispensed with in the film and there is no change in the sound track and the picture remained same in all the 55 prints of the film, obviously made out of one negative, the order of the learned Single Judge .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r construed it in the manner it ought to have been done. As rightly pointed out by the learned Single Judge, the Tribunal appears to have proceeded upon certain assumptions based on typothetical considerations about the so called conventional methods of dubbing in considering the legality and propriety of the claim made by the first respondent. The Board, in our view, alone has approached the problem in its proper perspective when it observed that though the prints have been taken from the same master negative, language-wise each film is different from the other not only in title but also in regard to the language in which the introductory portion is covered. It may also be pointed out here that concedingly, the prints made in different lan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tification for public exhibition, every revised version or shorter version of a film shall be deemed to be a fresh film. 8.The law relating to the Cinematograph Act, which provides for certification of films, cannot be totally ignored as has been done by the Tribunal in this case in considering the claim for exemption, particularly having regard to the wordings of the exemption notification, which has been extracted supra. The entry, particularly the one relating to the description, makes it very clear that it has relevance to feature film not exceeding 4000 metres in length cleared for home consumption before the date of first release of the film for public exhibition. The censor Board cannot be taken to have issued separate certificates .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates