Latest news with #BVNagarathna
Time of India
13 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
SC verdict may hike tax burden on OTT platforms, gaming apps
New Delhi: The Supreme Court ruling allowing dual taxation on television broadcasters may increase tax burden on over-the-top (OTT) platforms such as Amazon Prime and Netflix and other subscription based digital content and even gaming applications, said its May 22 judgment on Asianet Satellite Communications and others, a bench of justices BV Nagarathna and NK Singh ruled that broadcasting involves delivery of service and delivery of entertainment and can be taxed by different means the Centre can impose service tax on the act of broadcasting, while states are allowed to charge entertainment tax on the content consumed by viewers. "The ruling is mainly premised on the basis that both taxes deal with different aspects of broadcasting activities and hence, there is no overlap in taxing powers of the Centre and state," said Saloni Roy, partner, Deloitte India. She added that although the case relates to the pre-goods and services tax (GST)era, the judgment could have "significant implications" and that it has created tax uncertainty for the industry. Experts said it may lead to decentralisation of tax. "By endorsing the 'aspect theory', which permits separate taxation of different elements of the same activity, the court has opened the door to potential dual taxation on digital platforms such as OTT services, gaming apps and social media," said Saurabh Agarwal, partner, EY. He added the ruling has not only created more confusion for the industry, but also goes against the spirit of the GST, which was designed to unify and replace various indirect taxes, including entertainment tax. "This ruling may pave the way for states or even local bodies-under Entry 62 of the Constitution-to reintroduce such levies under the label of 'entertainment," Agarwal said, adding that this may pose a challenge for the GST Council. In the pre-GST era, state governments were empowered to levy tax on entertainment. "With the introduction of GST, state governments are still empowered to levy tax on entertainment and amusement. However, this is permitted through local bodies such as panchayats, municipalities, etc.," Roy said. For instance, Haryana Municipal Entertainment Duty Act, 2019 permits levy of duties with respect to admission to public entertainments, which includes any exhibition, performance, amusement, game, sport or race to which persons are ordinarily admitted on payment. Maharashtra Entertainments Duty Act, 2023 provides for the levy of duty in respect to entry to entertainment or exhibition, including direct-to-home broadcasting service, which is to be collected by local bodies. Similarly, Tamil Nadu charges both GST and entertainment tax on Indian Premier League match tickets. The digital industry under the streamlined tax regime under GST was aware of the taxation burden, but this decision reintroduces uncertainty, with the possibility of more states taxing OTT platforms , content creators and gaming applications in the name of entertainment. "There are many factors which should act against higher taxes for digital media as an indirect impact of this judgment, including the lack of territoriality in delivery of such services," said Shashank Mishra, Partner, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co.
Time of India
a day ago
- Business
- Time of India
SC verdict may hike tax burden on OTT platforms, gaming apps
New Delhi: The Supreme Court ruling allowing dual taxation on television broadcasters may increase tax burden on over-the-top (OTT) platforms such as Amazon Prime and Netflix and other subscription based digital content and even gaming applications, said experts. In its May 22 judgment on Asianet Satellite Communications and others, a bench of justices BV Nagarathna and NK Singh ruled that broadcasting involves delivery of service and delivery of entertainment and can be taxed by different authorities. This means the Centre can impose service tax on the act of broadcasting, while states are allowed to charge entertainment tax on the content consumed by viewers. "The ruling is mainly premised on the basis that both taxes deal with different aspects of broadcasting activities and hence, there is no overlap in taxing powers of the Centre and state," said Saloni Roy, partner, Deloitte India. She added that although the case relates to the pre-goods and services tax (GST)era, the judgment could have "significant implications" and that it has created tax uncertainty for the industry. Experts said it may lead to decentralisation of tax. "By endorsing the 'aspect theory', which permits separate taxation of different elements of the same activity, the court has opened the door to potential dual taxation on digital platforms such as OTT services, gaming apps and social media," said Saurabh Agarwal, partner, EY. He added the ruling has not only created more confusion for the industry, but also goes against the spirit of the GST, which was designed to unify and replace various indirect taxes, including entertainment tax. "This ruling may pave the way for states or even local bodies-under Entry 62 of the Constitution-to reintroduce such levies under the label of 'entertainment," Agarwal said, adding that this may pose a challenge for the GST Council. In the pre-GST era, state governments were empowered to levy tax on entertainment. "With the introduction of GST, state governments are still empowered to levy tax on entertainment and amusement. However, this is permitted through local bodies such as panchayats, municipalities, etc.," Roy said. For instance, Haryana Municipal Entertainment Duty Act, 2019 permits levy of duties with respect to admission to public entertainments, which includes any exhibition, performance, amusement, game, sport or race to which persons are ordinarily admitted on payment. Maharashtra Entertainments Duty Act, 2023 provides for the levy of duty in respect to entry to entertainment or exhibition, including direct-to-home broadcasting service, which is to be collected by local bodies. Similarly, Tamil Nadu charges both GST and entertainment tax on Indian Premier League match tickets. The digital industry under the streamlined tax regime under GST was aware of the taxation burden, but this decision reintroduces uncertainty, with the possibility of more states taxing OTT platforms, content creators and gaming applications in the name of entertainment. "There are many factors which should act against higher taxes for digital media as an indirect impact of this judgment, including the lack of territoriality in delivery of such services," said Shashank Mishra, Partner, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
You became a beast, not entitled to bail: SC to doc who molested daughter
Representative image New Delhi: Supreme Court Thursday refused to entertain a doctor's plea seeking suspension of the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to him after being convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (Pocso) for raping his seven-year-old daughter. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma said he was not entitled to bail, considering the kind of things he did to his daughter. The convict's lawyer contended that he was framed because of differences with his wife, and that she tutored the child to testify against him. His wife is also a doctor but despite that the medical examination of his daughter was delayed by three months and no injury marks were found on her body, the advocate said. The bench, however, said there was no reason to disbelieve the child's statement and she also withstood the cross-examination. "The man became a beast. Please don't force us to say anything more... She testified against her father. Why should we disbelieve her," it asked. Pressing for relief, the convict said it would take years for Allahabad HC to decide his appeal and he would have to languish in jail during the pendency of the case. He said 12 lakh cases were pending in HC, and appeals filed in 1981 were being heard now. But SC refused his plea and granted him permission to file a fresh bail petition after some time. "This is the most liberal bench and if we are not granting bail it means there is something. We cannot help it," Justice Sharma said. The man was convicted by a Varanasi court and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
'Man becomes a beast after drinking': SC denies relief to Haldwani doctor convicted of sexually assaulting 7-year-old daughter
Court remarks on conduct under alcohol Testimony of child holds weight Lawyer cites pending cases Live Events Background of the case (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain the plea of a cardiologist convicted of sexually assaulting his seven-year-old daughter, dismissing his request to suspend the sentence. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma heard the matter and said the offence was serious and no relief could be granted, a PTI report the hearing, the bench noted the doctor had committed the assault while under the influence of alcohol. The court observed, "Man becomes a beast after having a drink. We should not say this, but we are the most liberal bench. If we are not giving bail, there are reasons."The judges also said, "See, the kind of things he has done to the child. You do not deserve any relief. The child has made statements against your client. He is a perverse guy, not entitled to any suspension. They were drunk."The bench pointed out that the girl had testified against her father and withstood cross-examination. The judges stated, "You can't do this to your own daughter. Why will she testify against father. She is a small girl who has withstood cross examination."The doctor's lawyer argued that the child's testimony was tutored and pointed to the delay in appeals due to a backlog of over 12 lakh cases in the Allahabad High Court. The lawyer said this delay meant the appeal might not be heard the top court said the pendency of cases could not be a reason to suspend the sentence. Following this, the lawyer withdrew the plea and the court dismissed the matter as to the First Information Report (FIR), the child's mother accused her husband of sexually assaulting their daughter. She lives in Varanasi, while her estranged husband stays in Haldwani, where he runs a nursing March 23, 2018, the doctor took the child to Haldwani. A week later, on March 30, he called his wife to take their daughter back. The girl later told her mother that her father had touched her inappropriately.(Inputs from PTI)
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Single hand can't clap': Apex court gives bail to influencer in rape case
The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted interim bail to a 23-year-old social media influencer accused of raping a 40-year-old woman after he had spent nine months in jail without charges being framed in the case. A bench of justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma questioned the Delhi Police's decision to invoke rape charges in the case, noting that the woman was an adult who had voluntarily accompanied the accused on outstation trips on multiple occasions. 'A single hand can't clap. On what basis have you filed a case under Section 376 of IPC? She is not a baby. The woman is 40 years old. They have gone together to Jammu,' the bench observed. 'Why have you invoked 376? This lady goes to Jammu seven times and the husband is not bothered,' it added. The bench court also remarked on the man, asking, 'Who gets influenced by such people?' The judges made these observations orally in open court; in its order, the bench said the matter was fit for interim bail, given the accused's prolonged incarceration and delay in framing charges. 'Pending consideration of this special leave petition, we find that this is a fit case where interim bail ought to be granted to the petitioner herein who is aged about 23 years as of now since he has been in jail for over nine months (since 07.08.2024) and charges have not yet been framed till date. In the circumstance, we direct that the petitioner be produced before the concerned trial court as early as possible and the trial court shall release him on interim bail subject to such conditions as it may deem appropriate,' the Supreme Court said. The court also restrained the accused from contacting the complainant or misusing his liberty while out on bail. The observations came during a hearing on a plea filed by the accused, Harash Kumar,challenging a Delhi high court order that denied him bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations. According to the woman's complaint, she first met the accused in 2021 via social media while seeking promotional help for her clothing brand. What began as a professional relationship allegedly turned abusive, with the woman accusing Kumar of drugging, sexually assaulting, extorting, and threatening her over a period of the next two-and-a-half years. During initial interactions, the accused allegedly requested to be bought iPhone, which she arranged through a store in Jammu. However, their professional relationship soured after the accused attempted to resell the device. The authorised seller returned the money in the woman's account, but after deducting ₹20,000. Although he promised to return the money, the woman said she decided to end all ties with him. In December 2021, the man visited the woman at her Noida house to return the ₹20,000 and apologise. He subsequently persuaded her to travel for a brand shoot in Connaught Place. During the journey, the accused allegedly gave her sweets laced with intoxicants and she lost to assurances that she would be taken to Hindu Rao Hospital, the man allegedly took her to a secluded area behind the hospital, sexually assaulted her, stole money from her purse, and took nude photographs of her. Thereafter, the woman said, she was coerced into travelling to Jammu where she was subjected to continued sexual abuse, extortion, and threats over a two-and-a-half-year period, according to the complaint. Following her complaint, an FIR was registered against Kumar in July 2024, under sections 376, 354, 506, and 509 of the IPC for the offences of rape, sexual assault, criminal intimidation, and insulting the modesty of a woman. Kumar was arrested by the Delhi police from Jammu in August 2024. In its April 30, 2025, order denying bail to the accused, the Delhi high court had acknowledged the existence of extensive WhatsApp exchanges between the complainant and Kumar, indicating a prior relationship. The high court had noted at the time that the complainant did not dispute that she and Kumar knew each other before the alleged incidents of rape and sexual assault. Kumar's counsel had submitted over 100 pages of WhatsApp chats, which included exchanges of birthday greetings, discussions about meetings, and expressions of affection. There was even a message where the complainant demanded a mangalsutra for daily wear. Incidentally, these messages spanned both before and after the alleged rape incident, the high court had noted at the time. Despite these observations, the high court had ultimately held that the WhatsApp messages did indicate 'sustained and deliberate acts of blackmail, criminal intimidation, and extortion.'
