A bench of justices Badar Durrez Ahemed and Sanjeev Sachdeva, however, quashed the Delhi government's December 2012 circular and show cause notices served by its Department of Entertainment Tax asking multi-system operators (MSOs) to to pay entertainment tax or face action.
Terming the circular as "without any authority of law", the bench said, "To be clear, MSOs to the extent that they directly provide cable service to the subscribers without the intervention of any LCO (local cable operator), would be regarded as the proprietors under Section 7(1) and would be liable to collect and pay the entertainment tax to the government.
The court made it clear that as far as the assessments related to deposition to tax to the department are concerned, the MSOs "would have to take their own remedies against the assessment orders and/or appellate orders in view of the decision arrived at in this case".
The court's verdict came on pleas filed by four MSOs --DEN Networks Ltd, Hathway Cable and Datacom Ltd, IndusInd Media and Communications and SITI Cable Network Ltd.
They had also sought quashing of the Delhi government's December 17, 2012 circular and show cause notices issued in January 2014 directing them to deposit the entertainment tax beginning April 2013.
The Delhi government had threatened to stop cable TV transmission of the MSOs by shutting off their headends.
The MSOs have earned the wrath of the Delhi government for evading entertainment tax during 2013-14 and 2014-15.
The government had told the court that by virtue of the provisions of the said act and the said rules, the MSOs are liable to collect and pay the entertainment tax to the government. This is because under the new regime, they are required to bill the customers directly.
The court, however, observed that it "do not understand as to how the Entertainment Tax Officer held the MSOs and LCOs jointly and severally responsible for payment of entertainment tax.
"...The argument of the respondents (Delhi government) that the changed system was brought about by the regulations and the directions of TRAI and, therefore, MSOs were liable to collect and pay entertainment tax, is an argument which is stated to be rejected," the bench observed.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
