Latest news with #1994
CTV News
5 days ago
- General
- CTV News
Classic Sports Moments - A 1994 CFL preseason game between the Riders and the Sacramento Gold Miners
The Riders beat the Sacramento Gold Miners in a preseason game at Taylor Field in 1994. The Gold Miners would cease operations at the end of the year.
CTV News
5 days ago
- General
- CTV News
Classis Sports Moments - An untelevised CFL game between the Las Vegas Posse vs the Riders in 1994
Watch Matt Young digs into our archive for the first and final time the Las Vegas Posse traveled to Saskatchewan to play the Riders at Taylor Field in 1994
Daily Mail
26-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Silverchair frontman Daniel Johns shares bizarre 'time travelling' post to social media - after troubling message on his 46th birthday
has left his fans confused after sharing an unusual post to Instagram on Monday. The Silverchair frontman posed for a sultry selfie and was looking well - but it was the attached caption that raised eyebrows. 'Just got back from Cannes, the 1994 Pulp Fiction premiere was incredible - I always wanted to see it on the big screen!' Daniel wrote. 'Great job @tarantinouniverse and cast @johntravolta @samuelljackson #brucewilliss @umathurman / heading to a rave next week!' The caption implied he had travelled back to the year 1994, when the Quentin Tarantino premiered at the famous French film festival. 'Time travelling now?' asked one person in the comments underneath the post while another said, 'Yep and he refers to 1994 here which is when Silverchair all started to kick off…' 'Daniel you can't just disappear for two years and time travel back to 2025' someone else wrote. 'His last post said "I have to go back in time to finalise something..."' added someone else, referring to Johns' birthday message in April. Last month, Daniel announced that he is taking a hiatus from social media, as he celebrated his 46th birthday. He posted to Instagram to mark the occasion, but added a cryptic message that implied he was in need of solitude, perhaps to work on a new art project. 'The beautiful thing about time, is that it is always in the eye of the beholder. Art is exactly the same' the Australian rocker wrote. 'As an artist you never know what time it is. It's an ongoing quest to interpret happiness and sadness with a sprinkling of absurdity. It's drama. It's comedy. It's poetry. It's a song. It's cinema' he continued. 'Everything is beautiful if you let it be.' Johns concluded the post: 'I have to go back in time to finalise something and as a result I won't be on socials, my team will keep an eye on things. I will have my phone. All is love'. The rock star has stayed largely out of the spotlight the past few years, after highly publicised legal and substance abuse issues. In 2022, Johns released his second solo album, FutureNever, while in rehab. In a statement published through his record label BMG the troubled rock star described the album as 'manic' and said he's no longer 'running' from his past. Johns checked into rehab in late March, 2022 after he was pulled over on the Pacific Highway at North Arm Cove near Newcastle, NSW on March 23, and recorded a blood-alcohol reading of more than three times the legal limit. He pleaded guilty. Police said Johns had crossed into the opposite lane of traffic and collided with a van on the Pacific Highway near Newcastle on March 23. His lawyer Bryan Wrench entered a guilty plea on Johns' behalf at Raymond Terrace Local Court on April 11, 2022. Johns dodged a jail sentence for high-range drink driving after a magistrate ruled time behind bars would be of little benefit to the 'deeply troubled' rock star. He was given a 10-month intensive corrections order - a court sentence of two years or less which is served in the community under the strict supervision of Community Corrections. The star was also disqualified from driving for seven months and ordered to install an alcohol-reading interlock device to his car for 24 months once he gets his licence back. Johns' lawyer Bryan Wrench said his client was at pains to show the court how serious he had taken the charge since entering rehab and his subsequent discharge by remaining abstinent from alcohol. In a phone call transcribed from rehab and posted to his Instagram account on April 16, 2022, Johns addressed his relationship with alcohol and also offered an apology. 'My drinking had become a bigger problem than I even realised, and how I have used it to help numb a range of deeper psychological issues that I've been living with since childhood,' he said. 'Some of these issues you know, and a lot cut much deeper. Alcohol is not medicine. I should never have treated it like it was. I feel like a complete f**k-up and I'm sorry. 'I take full responsibility for my actions on the evening of March 23rd, I am deeply remorseful and I am working every day to make amends. I am handling these matters professionally and privately.' Shortly after the accident in March, Johns posted that he had been suffering from 'panic attacks' and the accident occurred after becoming 'lost' on the road. 'As you know, my mental health is a work in progress. I have good days and bad days but it's something I always have to manage,' he said. 'Over the last week I began to experience panic attacks. Last night I got lost while driving and I was in an accident. I am OK, everyone is OK. 'Alongside my therapy, I've been self-medicating with alcohol to deal with my anxiety and depression. I know this is not sustainable or healthy. 'I have to step back now as I'm self-admitting to a rehabilitation centre and I don't know how long I'll be there. Appreciate your love and support as always.' The drink-driving crash came just weeks after Daniel slammed his Silverchair 'colleagues' for allegedly not supporting him when he was gravely ill in 2002. The singer and guitarist revealed in a Facebook post that he'd been diagnosed with reactive arthritis, an inflammation of the joints that left him in crippling pain, when the band was launching their fourth album Diorama. Johns, who also was being treated for anxiety and anorexia at the time, claimed he did not receive the help he needed, and felt his band was 'more of a business than family'. Daniel's Silverchair bandmates Ben Gillies and Chris Joannou recently revealed exactly how the iconic rock band ended. Writing about Silverchair's demise in their joint memoir, the pair claimed Daniel put them on an 'emotional rollercoaster' by breaking up the band multiple times - only to then change his mind. However, things finally came to an end when the trio performed at the Groovin' The Moo music festival in 2010. Ben said he received a 'confusing call' from Daniel shortly after the performance, saying the two words: 'It's inevitable.' While Daniel never explicitly said the band was breaking up, Ben and Chris were later informed by their manager it was over and that a press release announcing their 'indefinite hiatus' would be going out to the media. The former bandmates rose to fame as as 15-year-olds and took the world by storm with their debut album Frogstomp in 1995, before splitting in 2011. The musicians have said they had 'drifted apart' from Johns since Silverchair disbanded.
The Print
22-05-2025
- Business
- The Print
DTH services liable to pay service and entertainment tax: SC
The entry deals with taxes on luxuries, including taxes on entertainments, amusements, betting and gambling. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh said broadcast was a service and liable to service tax imposed by Parliament and the activity of entertainment under Entry 62-List II in the Constitution. New Delhi, May 22 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that state legislatures and Parliament can levy entertainment tax and service tax respectively on DTH services provided to consumers. The top court said no entertainment could be presented to the viewers unless the broadcaster transmitted the signals for instantaneous presentation of any performance, film or any programme on their television. 'Thus, there are two aspects in this activity — the act of transmission of signals of the content to the subscribers. The second aspect here concerns not only the content of the signals, but the effect of the decryption of the signals by the set-top boxes and the viewing cards inside these boxes provided by the assessees to the subscribers, which is providing and receiving of entertainment through the television,' the bench said. Without the apparatus provided for by the assessees to decrypt the signals, the court noted, the subscriber would not be able to watch the transmitted content, which is consumed for entertainment. 'The television entertainment provided by them through their modus operandi, i.e., by broadcasting, is a luxury within the meaning of Entry 62 – List II,' the bench said. The DTH operators engaged in the activity of providing entertainment were liable to pay service tax on the activity of broadcasting under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994, being further liable to pay entertainment tax, it held. The verdict came on a batch of appeals against high court orders which held that levy of entertainment tax was unconstitutional. Another batch of appeals filed by DTH operators challenged the provisions of the respective state Acts levying entertainment tax on them. The operators argued that they were not liable to pay entertainment tax (or luxury tax) under the respective provisions of the state enactments as they were broadcasting signals, etc., through television channels to the subscribers. PTI PKS PKS AMK AMK This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Time of India
22-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Broadcasters have to pay both service, luxury taxes: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Thursday held that broadcasters are liable to pay both service tax and entertainment tax on the broadcasting activity for the purpose of entertainment of the subscriber as both Parliament and the state legislatures have the legislative competence to levy the taxes. The two taxes are different aspects of the same activity which enable two different legislatures to impose tax under distinct taxation entries in two different Lists, the apex court said. A bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and N.K. Singh said that in the instant case, the Parliament under the Finance Act, 1994 and its amendments is not imposing a tax on entertainment. Such a tax is being imposed by the state legislatures as entertainment is a luxury within the meaning of Entry 62 - List II, it said. Play Video Pause Skip Backward Skip Forward Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration 0:00 Loaded : 0% 0:00 Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 1x Playback Rate Chapters Chapters Descriptions descriptions off , selected Captions captions settings , opens captions settings dialog captions off , selected Audio Track default , selected Picture-in-Picture Fullscreen This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Text Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Caption Area Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Drop shadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Conheça o óculos militar que os homens 40+ querem Óculos Max Saiba Mais Undo 'In the same way, the Finance Act along with its amendments seeks to impose a tax on the service rendered by the broadcasting agency which is imposed under Entry 97 List – I. In the same vein, under Entry 62 List – II, the state governments are not imposing any service tax on the assesses,' the top court said. It further stated that there is no overlapping in fact or in law, inasmuch as different aspects of the same activity are being taxed under two different legislations by two different legislatures. 'This is because the activity of broadcasting is a service and liable to service tax imposed by the Parliament (Entry 97 – List I of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution) and the activity of entertainment is a subject falling under Entry 62 - List II and therefore, the assessees herein are liable to pay entertainment tax as well. Hence, the State Legislatures as well as the Parliament, both have the legislative competence to levy entertainment tax as well as service tax respectively on the activity carried out by the assessees herein,' the judgment stated. Live Events According to it, no entertainment can be presented to the viewers unless the broadcaster transmits the signals for instantaneous presentation of any performance, film or any programme on their television. 'Thus, there are two aspects in this activity; the first is the act of transmission of signals of the content to the subscribers. The second aspect here concerns not only the content of the signals, but the effect of the decryption of the signals by the Set-Top Boxes and the viewing cards inside these boxes provided by the assessees to the subscribers, which is providing and receiving of entertainment through the television. Without the apparatus provided for by the assessees to decrypt the signals, the subscriber would not be able to watch the content that is transmitted, the content being for the purpose of entertainment,' Justice Nagarathna, writing for the bench, said in her 321-page judgment. The television entertainment provided by them through broadcasting, is a luxury within the meaning of Entry 62 - List II. The assessees who are engaged in the activity of providing entertainment are liable to pay service tax on the activity of broadcasting under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 read with relevant amendments and are also liable to pay entertainment tax in terms of Entry 62 - List II as being a specie of luxuries, the court added. The apex court was hearing a batch of cases from different high courts (lead case being Kerala vs Asianet Satellite Communications) in which entertainment tax was charged from broadcasters by various states. The broadcasters claimed that they were not liable to pay entertainment tax (or luxury tax ) under the respective state enactments. They submitted that since they were engaged in broadcasting of signals through television channels to subscribers, hence, were possibly liable to pay only service tax to the Central government. It set aside the Kerala High Court's 2012 judgment that had held that exemption given to cable operators from luxury tax while making DTH operators to pay the same is a case of discriminatory levy of luxury tax merely because of technological differences in the system of delivery of entertainment in both the services. The top court said that the 2012 judgment, which declared the levy and collection of luxury tax on cable television operators with connections of 7,500 or more as unconstitutional for being discriminatory was "incorrect".
