As per the case facts multiple appeals and writ petitions were filed concerning the levy and collection of entertainment tax and luxury tax on various broadcasting and communication services including ... cable TV operators and DTH services by different state governments The High Courts had given conflicting judgments and the matter reached the Supreme Court to clarify the legislative competence of states to impose such taxes The question arose regarding the legislative competence of State Legislatures to impose entertainment tax and luxury tax on broadcasting services particularly DTH and cable TV given the Union's power over broadcasting and other forms of communication and whether the 'aspect theory' of taxation applies Finally the Supreme Court deliberated extensively on the interpretation of entries in the Seventh Schedule and the 'aspect theory' of taxation The Court concluded that taxation is a distinct matter for legislative competence It clarified that while the Union has legislative power over broadcasting states can levy taxes on entertainments as a tax on luxury if it falls within their legislative domain The Court partly allowed appeals against the Allahabad High Court's judgment to include DTH service within the original Act's purview The Court also set aside a Kerala High Court judgment that declared luxury tax on certain cable TV operators unconstitutional holding that the High Court should have struck down the exemption instead of finding discrimination effectively allowing the State of Kerala's appeal