SHANKAR VIDEO AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

                  SHANKAR VIDEO AND ANR.
                            v.
            THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

                              JULY 14, 1993

                [P.B. SAWANT AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.]                            B

     Cinematograph Act, 1952/Bombay Cinema (Regulations) Act,
1953/Maharashtra Cinema (Regulation) Rules, 1966 (as amended in 1987):

      S.2(c)/ss.2(a), 9/44.2.(c), 2([-6), Chapter Ill-B, rr.24-C-24-I, 24-     c
J-!'Video Cinema''-Video projector used to exhibit pre-recorded movies on
video cassettes with aid of VCRJVCP on a wide screen or wall fall within the
ambit of "video cinema" as defined in r.2([-6}-Exhibition of moving pictures
with aid of video projector amounts to giving such exhibition through the
medium of television.
                                                                               D
            1          11                                               11
       Word 'Television in expression 'through the medium of television in
r.2(f-6) would include a device having a screen operating on television
technology-The screen need not be inbuilt in the device and can be separate
from the apparatus.
                                                                               E
      Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, 1923:

      S.2-j-''Video Exhibition ''-Includes exhibition of cinematograph film
on the screen of a video projector-Video projection system is different from
a conventional cinema-theatre and is akin to a television set.
                                                                               F
      The appellants in appeal No.3213 of 1993, installed a video projector
system called 'ENTEL' whereby pre-recorded movies on a video cassette
were exhibited with the aid of VCR/VCP on a wide screen or a wall. They
obtained licences under the Maharashtra Cinemas (Regulation) Rules
1966 as amended by the Maharashtra Cinemas (Regulation) (Amendment)
Rules, 1987, to run a video cinema and were permitted to give exhibition G
by means of VCR/VCP for a charge of Rs.2 per person "ith a permitted
seating capacity of 75 persons. Respondent No.3, having a licence to run
a touring cinema, filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the
grant of licences to the appellants on the ground that their business was
not covered by the definition of 'video cinema" contained in rule 2(f-6).   H
                                    169
    170                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993] SUPP. 1 S.C.R.

A       The High Court allowed the writ petition holding that the video
  projector installed by the appellants differed from a television set and it
  was more akin to the projector in a conventional cinema and that it did
  not fall within the definition of video cinema contained in rule 2(f-6) of the
  Rules. The High Court, therefore, directed the State authorities to: (i)
B refrain from issuing licences for the conduct of video cinemas which used
  systems having separate projectors and separate screens (ii) issue video
  licence to only those who use T.V. sets with inbuilt picture tube of a size
  of more than 51 ems. and; (iii) forthwith cancel such illegal licences if
  issued and to stop shows on separate screens in video cinemas. The
   appellants filed the appeal by special leave. The other appeal was filed by
C four others who were running similar business and were affected by the
  .Judgment of the High Court.

         On the question: whether the video projectors used by the appellants
  .to exhibit pre-recorded movies on a video cassette with the aid of a
   VCR/VCP on a wide screen or a wall, can be reia:arded a "video cinema       11



D within the meaning of Rule 2 (f-6) of the Maharashtra Cinema (Regulation)
   Rules, 1966.

          Allowing the appeals, this Court

E        HELD: 1. The video projectors used by the appellants fall within the
    ambit of the definition of "video cinema" contained in rule 2(f-6) of the
    Maharashtra Cinema (Regulation) (Amendment) Rules 1987 and the High
    Court was not justified in taking a view to the contrary. (184-D]

          2. Keeping in view the provisions contained in clauses (i) and (iii)
F of sub-Rule (4) of Rule 24-1 of the Rules, the word "television" in the
    expression "through the medium of television" in rule 2(f-6) cannot be
    construed to mean a television set only. The said expression has to be
    interpreted to mean the system for reproducing on a screen visual images
    transmitted by radio singnals. It would include a device having a screen
G   operating on television technology. It is not the requirement of the said
    expression that the screen must be inbuilt in the device and it cannot be
    separate from the apparatus. (179-A-B, F-H; 180-A)

           Concise Oxford Dictionary referred to.

H         World Book Encyclopaedia, (1989) Vol.19, pp.95-98; The New En-
           SHANKAR VIDEO v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                         171

cyclopaedia B1itannica, 15th Edn., Vol.15, pp.238-43; McGraw-Hill En-           A
cyclopaedia of Science & Technology, 6th Edn., Vol.18, pp.184-88, 196-201,
206-209, referred to.·

      3.1. The vidto projector functions as a television receiver and an
exhibition of moving pictures given ~th the aid of a video projector
amounts to giving such exhibition through the medium of television. B
Though there are points of difference between a video projector and a
television set, but they are not such as to alter the character of the device.
Merely because in a video projector the screen is separated from the
machine and the imag~ is projected on the screen from the machine, it
does not mean that the device has ceased to be a system based on television C
if the technology on the basis of which it works is that used in a television.
                                               [181-B, E·F; 182·C·D; 184-C] .
     Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edn., Vol.11, p.617. Chamber's Science
and Technology Dictionary & McGraw-Hi// Encyclopaedia of Science &
Technology, 6th Edn., Vol.4, referred to.                                       D
      Central Excise Tariff, Chapter 85, Sub-Heading No.8528.00, referred
to.

       Dinesh Kumar Hunuman Prasad Tiwari v. State of Maharashtra, AIR
(1984) Bombay 34 and Sony Corporation America v. Universal City Studies         E
Inc., 78 L.Ed.2d, 574 at p.580, referred to.

      3.2. There is nothing either in the Act or in the rules which may give
an indication that the video projector has been excluded from the purview
of the definition of video cinema as contained in rule 2(f·6). On the other
hand, under the Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, 1923, as amended by              F
Maharashtra Act 11 of 1984 the expression "video Exhinbition" has been
defined, in Section 2(j) as including exhibition of a cinematograph film on
the screen of a video-scope, i.e., a video projector. This shows that for the
purpose of imposing entertainment duty the legislature has treated video
projection system as different from a conventional cinema theatre and has       G
treated it as akin to a television set. l1nposition of entertainment duty on
exhibition of cinematograph films by playing or re-playing a pre-recorded
cassette by means of a video cassette player or recorder either on the screen
of a television set or video scope or otherwise indicates that the legisature
assumes that the exhibition is permissible under the Act and the Rules
made thereunder. [182-E·G; 183,A-B, G-H; 184-A)                               H
     172                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1993) SUPP. 1 S.C.R.

A           3.3 Levy of entertainment duty on cinemas at a higher rate than that
     levied on video exhibition would not render the rules violative of Article
     14. In the matter of imposition of a tax the legislature has an extremly wide
     discretion in classif)ing items for tax purposes and the principle that
     discrimination would result of unequals are treated as equals has a very
.B   limited application. (183-D; 184-A-B)

           Venkateshwara 77zeatre v. State of Aizdhra Pradesh & Ors., JT (1993)
     3 SC 270 at pp.285-87, referred to.

           3.4. Rule 24-J cannot be invoked to curtail the ambit of the definition
C of video cinema contained in Rule 2(f..fi) of the Rules. The rule making
     authority has made special provisions in relation to the video-cinema in
     Rules 24-C to 24·1 in Chapter III-8 and after doing so it provided in Rule
     24·J that except the Rules mentioned therein the other provisions in the
     Rules shall not apply to the video-dnema. It has not been shown that Rule
     24-1 which prescribes the requirements of video-cinema does not contain
D    adequate provisions to deal with a place for exhibition of moving pictures
     by video projection system. [183-D·F)

           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 3213-
     3214 of 1993.
E        From the Judgment and Order dated 3rd and 6th July, 1992 of the
     Bombay High Court in W.P. No.618 of 1992.

          V.A. Bahde, V.M. Tarkunde, S.D. Mudaliar, Raian Karanjawala,
     P.K. Mullick, Rajesh Kumar and Ms. M. Karanjawala for the Appellants.
F
          S.K. Dholakia, S.M. Jadhav, A.S. Bhasme and Ms. Rajkumari
     Kashyap for the Respondents.

           The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

G          S.C. AGRAWAL, J.: Leave granted.

           We have heard learned couusel for the parties.

           These appeals raise the question whether the place wherein au
     exhibition of cinematograph films recorded ou a video cassette is given on
H    a large screen by the technology of video cassette recorder/player
        SHANKAR VIDEO v. STATEOFMAHARASHTRA[AGRAWAL,J.] 173

     (VCR/VCP) and Video Projector can be regarded a "video cinema" as            A
     defined in rule 2(f-6) of the Maharashtra Cinemas (Regulation) Rules,
     1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules').

            The Cinematograph Act, 1952 has been enacted by Parliament to
      make provision for the certification of cinematograph films for exhibition B
      and for regulating exhibition-' by means of cinematograph. The expression
     "cinematograph" is defined in section 2(c) of the said Act to include any
      apparatus for the representation of moving pictures or series of pictures.
     The. Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1953, hereinafter referred to as
      'the Act', has been enacted by the legislature of the erstwhile State of
      Bombay to provide for regulating exhibitions by means of cinematographs C
     and the licensing of places in which cinematograph films are exhibited in
     the State of Maharashtra. The expression "cinematograph" is defined in
     section 2(a) of the Act in the same terms as the expression is defined in
     section ,2(c) of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 referred to above. In exercise
      of the powers conferred by section 9 of the Act, the Government of D
      Maharashtra has made the Rules. In Dinesh Kumar Ha11uma11 Prasad
      Tiwari v. State of Maharashtra, AIR (1984) Bpmbay 34, the Bombay High
     Court has held that a VCR used for playing pre-recorded cassettes of
     movies on the screen of a television set comes within the definition of
     'cinematograph' as defined under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and exhibi-
     tion of films by playing pre-recorded cassettes on VCR and TV in cafes E
     and restaurants comes within the ban contained in section 3 of the Act,
     which prohibits exhibiton by means of a cinematograph elsewhere than a
     place licensed under the Act. Thereafter, the Government of Maharashtra
     amended the Rules by the Maharashtra Cinemas (Regulation) (Amend-
     ment) Rules, 1987. As a result of the said amendment in the Rules, the f
     definition of cinema as contained in clause (c) of rule 2 was amended to
     include a video cinema and the expression "video cinema" was defined in
     clause (f-6) of rule 2 to mean "any phce wherein an exhibition of moving
     pictures or seriel of pictures ·,is given by means of video cassette recorder, S
     video cassette player, or any such similar instrument or device through the
-t
     medium of television". A new Chapter 111-B (Rules 24-C and 24-J) con- G
     taining special provisions relating to video-cinemas was inserted in the
     Rules. Rules 24-C to 24-H relate to licence for video cinemas. In Rules
     24-1, provisions have been made with regard to requirements of a video
     cinema. Rule 24-J provide that in addition to the provisions of Chapter
     III-B, provisions of Chapter I, rules 3 and 4 of Chapter II, rules 103 to 104 H
                                                                                     •

    174                   ·suPREME COURT REPORTS [1993] SUPP. l S.C.R.

A   of Chapter VII, rules 116, 125, 127 to 129 of Chapter IX and rules 131 to
    133 of Chapter X, shall mutatis mutandis apply to the video-cinema and
    that no other provision of the Rules shall apply to the video cinema.

         The appellants in appeal arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.13015/92
B have installed a video projector system called "ENTEL" based on the
  technology developed by NEC Corporation, Japan, whereby pre-recorded
  movies on a video cassette can be exhibited with the aid of a VCR/VCP
  on a wide screen or a wall. The said appeallants obtained licences under
  the Rules on the basis that they are running a video cinema since 1988.
  Under the said licences the said appellants were permitted to give exhibi-
C tion by means of VCR/VCP for a charge of Rs.2 per person with a
  permitted seating capacity of 75 persons. Swapnalok Touring Talkies,
  respondent No.3 in the said appeal, were having a licence to run a touring
  cinema. They filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court wherein the
  grant of licences to the appellant was challenged on the ground that a place
D wherein exhibition of films is given through the Video Projector system on
  a wide screen could not be licensed as a video cinema under the Rules
                                                                  1              1
  since such exhibition is not covered by the definition of 'video cinema'
  contined in rule 2(f-6). The said writ petition of respondent No.3 was
  allowed by a division bench of the High Court by judgment dated July 3,
  1992. It has been held that the Video Projector installed by the appellants
E differs from a television set and it is more akin to the projector in a
  conventional cinema and that it did not fall within the definition of video
  cinema contained in rule 2(f-6) of the Rules. The High Court, therefore,
  directed respondents Nos. 1 and 2 in the said civil appeal, namely, State
  of Maharashtra and the Collector, Nagpur and their officers and licensing
F authorities in the State to (i) refrain from issuing licenses for the conduct
  of video cinemas which used systems having separate projectors and
  separate screens (ii) issue video licence to only those who use T.V. sets
  with in built pictur<;'tube of a size of more than 51 ems., and (iii) forthwith
  cancel such illegal licences if issued and to stop shows on separate screens
  in video cinemas. Feeling aggrieved by the said decisions, the appellants,
G who were respondents in the said writ petition, have filed this appeal.                f-


           Civil .j\ppeal arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.15302/92 has been filed
    by four appellants who were exhibiting pre-recorded video cassettes of
    films thn;mgh VCR/VCP and video projectors and who, though not parties
H   to the Writ petition referred to above, are affected by the judgment of the
       SHANKAR VIDEO v. STATEOFMAHARASHTRA[AGRAWAL,J.] 175

    High Court. They have filed appeal to challenge the said judgment of the       A
    High Court after obtaining leave to file the special leave petition from the
    court.

          We have heard Shri V.A. Bobde and Shri V.M. Tarkunde, the
    learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants in the appeals, Shri
    S.K. Dholakia, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of
                                                                                   B
    Maharashtra, and Shri K. Sukumaran, learned senior counsel appearing for
    respondent No.3, who had filed the writ petition in the Bombay High
    Court.

          The questions arising for consideration in these appeals turn on the     C
    definition of the expression "video cinema" as contained in rule 2(f-6) of
    the Rules which reads as under:

            "'video-cinema' means any place wherein an exhibition of moving
            pictures of series of pictures is given by means of a video cassette   D
            recorder, video cassette player, or any such similar instrument or
            device through the medium of television."

          The said definition p()stnlates the following three requirements:

            (i)   a place wherein an exhibition of moving pictures or series of    E
                  pictures is give.Jl

            (ii) by means of a VCRNCP or any such similar instrument or
                 device

            (iii) through the medium of television.                                F
          There is no dispute that conditions (i) and (ii) are satisfied by the
    appellants in the instant case because they have a place wherein exhibition
    of moving pictures or series of pictures recorded on a video cassette is
    given by means of a VCRNCP. The controversy is limited to the fulfilment
•   of the third condition, viz., that the said exhibition must be through the G
     medium of television. In order to resolve this contioversy it is necessary to
     construe the expression "through the medium of television" and more
    -especiallv the word "television. 11

          The word "television" is not defined in the Rules and we have to go      H
    176                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993] SUPP. l.S.C.R.

A   to its dictionary meaning. It is thus defined in the Concise Oxford Diction-
    ary:

             "1 a system for reproducing on screen visual images transmitted
             (usu. with sound) by radio signals. 2 (in full television set) a device
             with a screen for receiving these signals. 3 television broadcasting
B            generally."

         Of the three meanings assigned above the third is the widest while
  the second is the narrowest The first meaning is narrower than the third
  meaning but wider than the. second. The question is whether the word
C "television" in the expression "through the medium of television" in Rule
  2(f-6) is used in the narrowest sense of a television set as found by the High
  Court or in a broader sense contemplated in the first meaning as contended
  by the learned counsel for the appellants. Before we proceed to deal with
  this question we would briefy refer to the salient features of the technology
D on the basis of which the television system works.

            The television system is composed of three principal components,
    viz., (i) the television Camera, (ii) the television Transmitter and (iii) the
    television/Receiver. The television Camera converts the light from moving
E   visual images into a series of electrical signals. It captures images of the
    screen being telecast and creates video signals from the images. A black
    and white camera has only on camera tube while colour camera has three
    Sil.Ch tubes, one for each primary colour, red, blue and green and these
    tubes create a separate video signal for each colour. The three video signals
F   are combined with other signals to produce a compatible colour signal by
    the encoder in the camera. The sound is changed into·Ofidi!S' signals by the .
    microphone attached to the camera along with video signals the audio
    signals are relayed to the television Transmitter for direct telecast. The
    television Transmitter by increasing the frequency of the video as well as
    andio signals generates electromagnetic waves which are combined to form
G   the television signal which is broadcast on a particular channel by the            •
    tr.ansmission antenna. The television Receiver receives the signals broad-
    cast from the television Transmitter through the antenna or aerial attached
    to the television receiver. The signals from the antenna are fed into the
    tuner in the receiver which selects only the signal from the station the
H   viewer wants to receive and shuts out all others. From the tuner, the
       SHANKAR VIDEO v. STATEOFMAHARASHTRA[AGRAWAL,J.J 177

    television signal goes through a group of complicated electronic circuits in A
    the receiver which amplify the signal and separate the audio and video
    portions of it. The audio signals are changed into sound waves by the
    speaker. The video signals go to the picture tube where they recreate the
    picture. In a black and white receiver there is an electron gun in the neck
    of the cathode-ray picture tube having a phosphor screen which glows B
    when struck by an electron beam. Since the strength of the electron beam
    is controlled by the video signal from· the camera the intensity of the glow
    is proportional to the strength of the electron beam which corresponds to
    the original image. In a colour television receiver, the video signals first go
    into the decoder which transmits these signals into red, blue and green C
    signals that duplicates the signals from the three camera tubes and there-
    after they go to the picture tube. The neck of the colour picture tube holds
    three electron guns - one each for the red, blue, and green signals. Each
    electron gun in a colour picture tube shoots aseparate beam of electrons
    at the screen and each beam scans the screen. The screen of most colour
    tubes is coated with more than 300,000 tiny phosphor dots which are D
    grouped into triangular arrangements of three dots each one red, one blue,
    and one green and these dots glow with their respective colour when struck
    by an electron beam. A metal plate perforated with thousands of tiny holes
    lies about 1/2" behind the screen of a colour tube and this plate is called
    the shadow mask and its holes keep the beams from hitting any colour dots E
    but their own. Ordinarily the screen is in-built in the television receiver and
    it is a self contained unit which is known as the television set. See : World
    Book Encyclopaedia, (1989) Vol.91, pp.95-98; The New Encyclopaedia
    Britannica, 15th Edn., Vol. 15, pp.238-43; McGraw-Hill Encyclopaedia of
    Science & Technology, 6th Edn., Vol.18, pp.184-88, 196-201, 206-209.            F

            At this stage we may also refer to the manner in which a VCR or
    VTR functions. It performs two functions • (i) it can record on a magnetic
    tape in a video cassette the broadcast relayed a television transmitter and

-   (ii) it can play a pre-recorded video cassette to show the moving pictures
    recorded therein on a television screen. It consists of three basic com- G
    ponents - (i) a tuner which receives electromagnetic signals transmitted
    over the television band of the public air-waves and separates them into
    audio and visual signals; (ii) a recorder, which records such signals on a
    magnetic tape; and (iii) an adapter, which converts the audio and visual
    signals on the tape into a composite signal that can be received by a H
    178                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993] SUPP. 1 S.C.R.

A   television set: The separate tuner in the VCR/VCP enables it to record a
    braodcast off one station while the television set is tuned to another
    channel permitting the viewer to watch two simultaneous broadcasts, one
    live and recording the other for later viewing. See : Sony Coporation of
    America v. Universal City Studios Inc., 78 L.Ed. 2d. 574 at p.580. A VCP
B   cannot record a programme but it can play a pre-recorded video-cassette
    so as to convert the audio and visual signals on the tape into a composite
    signal that is received by a television receiver. With the aid of a VCR/VCP
    the pre-recorded cassette of a cinematograph film can be exhibited on the
    screen of a television receiver.

c          We now revert to the question posed earlier about the meaning to
    be assigned to the word "television" in Rule Z(f-6) of the Rules. We find
    that some light on the meaning of the said word is thrown by clauses (i),
    (ii) and (iii) of sub-rule (4) of rule 24-1 which prescribes the requirements
    of video cinema. Clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of sub-rule (4) provide as follows:

D            "24-1 Requirement of video-cinema. A video-cinema shall be ex-
             hibited so as to conform to the following requirements, that is to
             say - ,

             (4) (i) the distance between the television screen or any other screen
             used for exhibition of video-cinema and the front row of seats shall
E
             not be less than 1.80 metres;

             (ii) the television set used for exhibition through the video cassette
             recorder, video cassette player or any other instrument shall be
             kept -0n an elevated fixed platform so as to be visible to the viewers
F            sitting in the lasLrow;

             (iii) the size of the television screen or screen used for any other
             media shall not be less than 51 centimetres;" (Emphasis supplied)

          In contradistinction to the words "television \Set" used in clause (ii)
G   the words "the television screen or any other screen used for exhibition of
    videocinema11 are used in clause (i) and the words 11 television screen or
    screen used for any other media" have been used in clause (iii). The
    difference in the phraseography used in clauses (i) and (iii) on the one
    band and clause (ii) on the other, would indicate that the screen that is
H   used for exhibition is not confined to the screen of a Television Set but
          SHANKAR VIDEO'" STATEOFMAHARASHTRA!AGRAWAL.J.] 179

       would include any other screen on which pictures are exhibited through           A
       VCR/VCP and television. The words "television set" have been used in
       clause (ii) for the reason that the requirements of the said clause about
       placing the apparatus on an elevated fixed platform can apply to a
       television set only and it cannot apply when there is a separate screen
       which is fixed on the wall. The word "television" in the expression "through
       the medium of television" in Rule 2(f-6) cannot, therefore, be confined to
                                                                                        B
       a television set but would include a device having a screen operating on
       television technology and it is not the requirement of the said expression
       that the screen must be inbuilt in the device and it cannot be separate from
       the apparatus. While referring to clause (i) of sub-rule (4) of Rule 24-1,
       the High Court has expressed the view that the words "any other screen"          c
       in the said clause refer to an additional screen which can be fixed at a short
       distance in front of the television set. We find no basis for thus restricting
       the meaning of the words 11 any other screen 11 which are wider and com-
       prehensive to cover every screen on which pictures are exhibited through
       VCR/VCP. After referring to clause (iii) of sub-rule (4), the High Court         D
       has expressed the view that the manner in which the Rules have been
       generally framed and worded docs leave scope for the argument that use
       of other equipment is permitted and that it was most unfortunate that the
....   State Government had not aken the trouble to ensure that minor inconsis-
       tencies and ambiguities were eliminated. According to the High Court the ·
       Rules are drafted in a shoddy fashion whereby the implementing E
       authorities have been provided with elbow room to run a Nelson's eye at
       infringments of the present type and to even pro\1de justification for acting
       contrary to the spirit of the provisions on the ground that such a course of
       action is permissible by virue of the unsatisfactory wording. The High
       Court went on to hold that nothing in the Rules can override the definition F
       in the Act. In taking this view the High Court was under a misapprehension
       that definition of 'video cinema' is contained in the Act and the provisions
       in clauses (i) and (iii) of sub-Rule (4) of Rule 24-1 could not override the
       said definition. The expression 11video-cinema11 is, however, defined in Rule
       2(f-6) of the Rules and the other provisions contained in the Rules can be
       taken into consideration for construing the said definition. Keeping in view G
       the provisions contained in clauses (i) and (iii) of sub-Rule ( 4) of Rule 24-1
       of the Rules, we arc of the opinion that the word 11 television1' in the
       expression "through the medium of television" in rule 2(f-6) cannot be
       construed in the narrowest sense to mean a television set and has to be
                                                                                        H
    180                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993) SUPP. l S.C.R.
                                                                                     .'

A given the first meaning assigned to the said word in the Consise O>.ford
    Dictiona1)', namely, a system for reproducing on a screen visual images
    transmitted by radio signals. It is, therefore, necessary to examine whether
    the Video Projector installed by the appellants can be regarded as such a
    system.

B         According to the New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edn., Vol. 11,
    p.617, it is a device for projecting television on to a large screen which
    became available in the late 1970s.

          The Chamber's Science and Technology Dictionary defines Video
C Projection System as "an optical presentation of a TV picutre on a separate
    open screen in contrast to the direct viewing of a CRT image, generally
    used for showing a large picture to an audience."

         In McGraw-Hill Encyclopaedia of Science & Technology, 6th Edn.,
    VolA, reference has been made to 'Theatre Television' and it is stated :
D
            "Because of nationwide and sometimes worldwide interest in cer-
             tain sporting or entertainment events, a one-way closed-circuit
            television systems are used to permit a number of geographically
            dispersed audiences to view the event simultaneously. In this ap-
            plication, the original television signal is transmitted and dis-
E           tributed to theatres which are eq nipped with large-screen
            television projection systems for displaying the received image to
            the paying audience." (p.46)

          From the technical data given in the brochure issued by the manufac-
F   turers of ENTEL Video Projection System, that has been placed on record
    it appears that it contains a built-in tuner and built-in stereo amplifier. It
    can receive the signals from the TV broadcasting station e.g. DoorDarshan
    programmes througli tlie antenna and it can also be connected directly to
    the video camera or to the video cassette recorder or the computer. Instead
    of one picture tube containing three electron guns, as in a television set, in
G the video projection system, there are three separate Cathode-Ray Tubes
    for the three primary colours, namely, red, blue and green which project
    the visual images through a series of lenses on the screen placed on a wall.
    The video projector can be fixed either on the ceiling or it can be placed
    on the floor. It would tlius appear that like a television set the video
H   projector is also a television receiver since it can receive T.V. signals
   SHANKAR VIDEO v. STATEOFMAHARASHTRA[AGRAWAL,J.] 181

transmitted from a television transmitter on a particular channel through        A
the antenna and the tuner and after separating the audio and video signals
it reproduces the sound on the speaker and the pictures on the screen.
Apart. from receiving T.V. programmes it can also be put to other uses in
the same way as a television set in the sense that it can be connected to a
VCR/VCP for the purpose of exhibiting a cinematograph film recorded on
a video cassette. It can also be connected to the computer as well as to the
                                                                                 B
video camera. The points of difference between a video projector and a
television set are as follows:

      (i) In a colour television set there is only one picture tube in which
the three primary colours, viz., red, blue and green are fed in three electron   C
guns located in the neck of the picture tube whereas in a video projection
system, there are there separate tubes for the three primary colours.

      (ii) In a television set screen is a part of the television set and the
picture is reproduced on the said screeit whereas in a video projection
system the screen is separate and is fixed on the wall while the video           D
projector can be fixed either on the ceiling or on the floor.

      (iii) In a television set the picture is reproduced on the screen when
the electron beams of the three primary colours strike the screen of the
picture coated with tiny phosphor dots whereas in a video projection             E
system the picture is reproduced by projection of beams from the three
picture tubes through the series of lenses of the cloth or plastic screen on
the wall.

       These points of difference are the result of further advancement in
television technology so that the reproduction of images through the             F
process of television can be available fer a larger andience. These differen-
ces are not such as to alter the character of the device and in spite of these
differences a video projector is a television receiver like a television set.

      In this context, it would not be out of place to refer to the Central      G
Excise Tariff. Sub-Heading No.8528.00 in Chapter 85 is in the following
terms:

         11
          Television receivers (including videqmonitors and video projec-
         tors), whether or not combined, in the same housing, with radio-
         broadcast receivers or sound or video recording or reproducing H
                                                                                   1-

    182                    . SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1993] SUPP. 1 S.C.R.

A            apparatus."

          This would show lhal for the purpose of. levy of excise duly, video
    projectors are included under the head of" :'television receivers''. rhe
    Learned counsel for the appellants have invited our attention to the Gate
    Pass issued in Form G.P.l about levy of central excise duty on the video
B   projectors manufactured by ENTEL Projec(ors which shows that excise
    duty was paid on the same under sub-heading·.No.8528.00.

         The High Court has held that a video projector is not covered by the
  definition of "video cinema" as contained in rule 2(f-6) for the reason that
C the screen is separated from the main body of the machine and the image
  is projected on the screen and the device is more like a conventional
  cinema than like a television and to hold otherwise would be acting
  contrary to the spirit of the provisions. We are unable to agree. Merely
  because the screen is separated_ from the machine and the image is
    projected on the screen from the machine does not, in our opinion, mean
D   that the device has ceased to be a system based on television if the
    technology on the basis of which it works is that used in television.

         The contention that the Video Projector and the screen are using the
  same technique as the T.V. set was rejected by the High Court for the
E reason that such equipment is not only outside the definition but is !so
  excluded by the spirit of the provision and in that regard, the High Court
  has observed that th~ Act contemplates the existence of the conventional
  cinema and that by amendment the Act has made provision for this new
  form of exhibition and it does not assume of the second encroaching on
  the first. We are unable to appreciate this reasoning of the High Court.
F We do not find anything either in the Act or in the Rules which may give
  an indication that the video projector has been excluded from the purview
  of the definition of video cinema as contained in rule 2(f-6). On the <;>ther
  hand, we find that under the Bombay Entertainment duty Act, 1923, as
  amended by Maharashtra Act 11 of 1984 the expression "video exhibition"
G has been defined in section 20) in the following manner:
            '"video exhibition' means an exhibition of a cinematograph film or
            moving pictures or series of pictures organised for a financial gain
            by playing or pre-playing a re- recored cassette by means of a video
            cassette player or recorder either on the screen of a television set    '-
H           or video scope or otherwise, at residential or non-residential place
    SHANKAR VIDEO v. STATBOFMAHARASHTRA[AGRAWAL,J.] 183

         of entertainment, other than a hotel or a public vehicle which is   A
         or is not licensed under the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act,
         1953 and the rules made thereunder or under any law for the time
         being in force."

The aforesaid provision would indicate that entertainment duty is charge-
able on exhibition of cinematograph films by playing or re-playing a pre-
                                                                              B
recorded cassette by means. of a video cassette player or recorder either
on the screen of a television set or video scope or otherwise and assumes
that such exhibition is permissible under the Act and the rules made
thereunder. It has been submitted that the appellants have been paying
entertainment duty on the basis of the permits issued to them in accord-      c
ance with the provision of the said Act.

        The High Court has observed that the video show of the type the
 appellants are showing is virtually a cinema show in truth and substance
 and in that context the High Court has made a reference to Rule 24-J which D
 exempts the video cinema from certain regulations. The High Court has
 also pointed out that entertaimnent duty for cinema as much higher and
 that the interpretation sought to be canvassed on behalf of the appellants,
 if accepted, would render equals as unequals and unequals as equals and
 would render the relevant rules violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the
 Constitution. We find it difficult to subscribe to this view. Keeping in view E
 the special features of a video-cinema the Rule making authority has made
·special provisions in relation to the video-cinema in Rules 24-C to 24-1 in
 Chapter III-B and after doing so it provided in Rule 24-J that except the
 Rules mentioned therein the other provisions in the Rules shall not apply
 tp the video-cinema. It has not been shown that Rule 24-1 which prescribes F
 the requirements of video- cinema doe"s not contain adequate provisions to
 deal with a place for exhibition of moving pictures by video projection
 system. It is, therefore, difficult to appreciate how Rule 24-J°can be invoked
 to curtail the ambit of the definition of video cinema contained in Rule
 2(f-6) of the Rules. So also the principle that unequals are being treated
 equally arid equals are being treated unequally, to which reference has G
 been made by the High Court on the b'l'Ound that the entertainment'duty
 for cinema is much higher, cannot be invoked to rut down the scope of
 Rule 2(f-6). As noticed earlier under the Bombay Entertainment Duty Act,
 1953, the expression "Video Exhibition", as defined in Section 2G) of the
 said Act includes exhibition of a cinematograph film on the screen of a H
    184                   SUPREME COURT RP.PORTS [1993] SUPP. 1 S.C.R.

A video scope, i.e., a video projector. This shows that for the purpose of
  imposing entertainment duty the legislature has treated video projection
  system as different from a conventional cinema theatre and has treated it
  as akin to a television set. In the matter of imposition of a tax, e.g.,
  entertainment duty, the legislature has an extremely wide discretion in
B classifying items for tax purposes, so long as it refrains from clear and
  hostile discrimination against particular persons or classes and the prin-
  ciple that discrimination would result if unequalls are treated as equals,
  has a very limited application. See : Venkateshwara Theatre v. State of
  Andhra Pradesh & Ors., JT (1993) 3 SC 270 at pp.285-87.

C         For the reasons mentioned above we are unable to endorse the view
    of the High Court that exhibition of moving pictures given by means of
    VCR/VCP and a video projector does not fall within the ambit of the
    definition of 'video-cinema' contained in Rule 2(f- 6) of the Rules. In our
    view the video projector functions as a television receiver and an exhibition
    of moving pictures given with the aid of a video projector amounts to giving
D   such exhibition through the medium of television. It must, therefore, be
    concluded that Video Projectors used by the appellants fall within the
    ambit of the definition of ''video cinema" contained in rule 2(f-6) of the
    Rules and the High Court was not justified in taking a view to the contrary.

E          The appeals are accordingly allowed and the judgment and order of
    the Bombay High Court dated July 3, 1992 in Writ Petition (C) No.618/92
    is set aside and the said writ petition filed by respondent No.3 is dismissed.
    The parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.

    R.P.                                                        Appeals allowed.