<p>A PIL has been filed in the apex court challenging the Uttar Pradesh government’s decision for granting of entertainment tax waiver to the company for organising the sporting event.<br />A bench of justices D K Jain and A R Dave passed an interim order directing the company to deposit the amount, the 25 per cent of total sale proceeds of tickets– which would be equal to the entertainment tax – amid opposition from senior counsel Mukul Rohtagi, appearing for the organiser.<br /><br />“We are developing the entire area. We are building sports academy and stadium. There was no need of any interim order. Any direction to pay would act as dampener and invite adverse publicity,” he said. “How can it be a dampener or cause adverse publicity we do not understand,” the Bench countered, rejecting his arguments.<br /><br />Rohtagi also claimed that the organisers have invested over Rs 2,000 crore. If the amount had been deposited in bank, the interest would have been more than Rs 200 crore, he said, adding that the company expected only Rs 75 crore from sale of tickets.<br /><br />During the hearing, the court questioned former Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam, who, while appearing for Uttar Pradesh government, submitted that the event being organised was a part of a special development zone (SDZ) project initiated in 2007 for building infrastructural facilities.<br /><br />“What sports are to be conducted in that development? It has to be conducted in entire scheme of development? These are the genuine doubts in our mind,” the Bench said.<br />The Bench said it was concerned as to what exactly was the special development zone aimed at and whether it catered to the needs of the common man, middle class, lower middle class or the elite.<br /><br />However, the court clarified that it was not examining the legality or otherwise of the Formula 1 race event, but restricting itself only to examining the validity of the entertainment tax exemption granted by the state government.<br /><br />Formula 1 grand prix is to be held on October 30. The track is estimated to have been built at a cost of $350 million at Greater Noida.<br /><br />The PIL filed by Amit Kumar had contended that there was “no justification for one of the most backward states” to provide waiver of entertainment tax to the organiser.<br /><br />“The Formula-1 racing sport has no connection with the general populace at the grassroots level and panders to the tastes of the very rich and the social and financial elite and therefore the grant of exemption from the payment of entertainment tax was not warranted in the facts of the case,” the PIL had said.<br /></p>
<p>A PIL has been filed in the apex court challenging the Uttar Pradesh government’s decision for granting of entertainment tax waiver to the company for organising the sporting event.<br />A bench of justices D K Jain and A R Dave passed an interim order directing the company to deposit the amount, the 25 per cent of total sale proceeds of tickets– which would be equal to the entertainment tax – amid opposition from senior counsel Mukul Rohtagi, appearing for the organiser.<br /><br />“We are developing the entire area. We are building sports academy and stadium. There was no need of any interim order. Any direction to pay would act as dampener and invite adverse publicity,” he said. “How can it be a dampener or cause adverse publicity we do not understand,” the Bench countered, rejecting his arguments.<br /><br />Rohtagi also claimed that the organisers have invested over Rs 2,000 crore. If the amount had been deposited in bank, the interest would have been more than Rs 200 crore, he said, adding that the company expected only Rs 75 crore from sale of tickets.<br /><br />During the hearing, the court questioned former Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam, who, while appearing for Uttar Pradesh government, submitted that the event being organised was a part of a special development zone (SDZ) project initiated in 2007 for building infrastructural facilities.<br /><br />“What sports are to be conducted in that development? It has to be conducted in entire scheme of development? These are the genuine doubts in our mind,” the Bench said.<br />The Bench said it was concerned as to what exactly was the special development zone aimed at and whether it catered to the needs of the common man, middle class, lower middle class or the elite.<br /><br />However, the court clarified that it was not examining the legality or otherwise of the Formula 1 race event, but restricting itself only to examining the validity of the entertainment tax exemption granted by the state government.<br /><br />Formula 1 grand prix is to be held on October 30. The track is estimated to have been built at a cost of $350 million at Greater Noida.<br /><br />The PIL filed by Amit Kumar had contended that there was “no justification for one of the most backward states” to provide waiver of entertainment tax to the organiser.<br /><br />“The Formula-1 racing sport has no connection with the general populace at the grassroots level and panders to the tastes of the very rich and the social and financial elite and therefore the grant of exemption from the payment of entertainment tax was not warranted in the facts of the case,” the PIL had said.<br /></p>
