High Court gives it right on the face to Sidharth

One accepts that Sidharth is a good actor though we can’t say he is the best. He oozes confidence on his performance and as he rightly claims, a film actor also has to express wide range of emotions like any of the theatre artists or the folk artists. True. But can he compare films in par with theatre arts which are literally in the verge of extinction.

Folk art forms and theatre are two areas which need encouragement and aid from the government to see they are protected. But it is not the same for the films. Film Industry is a commercial media where in actors and technicians get paid well and it is lot more a business than just a mere art form these days. But actor Sidharth filed a Public Interest Litigation for the exemption of service tax for actors as he thinks actors in both media have to exhibit same kind of skills.

Madras High Court didn’t buy his argument and clearly brought out the distinction between theatre and films. Theatre and folk arts are our native arts and according to our constitution they get the beneficiary to preserve our rich cultural heritage. But it is not the case with films. Sidharth attacked the notification of the Centre exempting performing artistes or folk or classical art forms of music, dance or theatre from the liability paying service tax under Section 66 B of the Finance Act, 1994. He wanted the exemption for movie artists even and the Madras High Court outrightly decline the PIL.