JUDGMENT : Mampad Grama Panchayat, the petitioner in this Writ Petition, is a Village Panchayat constituted under Section 4 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, which is a 'local authority' as defined under sub-section (6) of Section 2 of the Kerala Local Authorities Entertainments Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner has approached this Court in this Writ Petition challenging Ext.P2 Government order dated 16.11.2009, by which the Government of Kerala exempted 'Kannankandi Trophy All India Sevens Football Tournament' conducted by 'Mampad Friends Club', from the liability to pay entertainments tax leviable under Section 3 of the said Act. 2. As discernible from Ext.P2 Government order, the 1st respondent made a request dated 6.11.2009 before the Government seeking exemption from the liability to pay entertainments tax under the Act, for 'Kannankandi Trophy All India Sevens Football Tournament' scheduled to be held from 13.11.2009 onwards. Based on the said request, the Government by Ext.P2 order exempted the said tournament from the levy of entertainments tax, by invoking its powers under Section 7A of the said Act. Ext.P2 order contains no reasons whatsoever for exempting the said tournament from the levy of tax under the said Act. 3. Heard arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner Grama Panchayat and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 2 and 3. In spite of service of notice, none appears for the 1st respondent. 4. The sole issue that arises for consideration in this Writ Petition is as to the legality or otherwise of the exemption granted to the 1st respondent, vide Ext.P2 Government order, from the liability to pay entertainments tax under the Act. 5. The Kerala Local Authorities Entertainments Tax Act, 1961 was enacted to unify and amend the law relating to the imposition and collection of taxes on amusements and other entertainments in the State of Kerala, which came into force on 1.4.1962, as notified by the Government in the Gazette. Subsection (4) of Section 2 of the Act defines 'entertainment' to include any exhibition, performance, amusement, game, sport or race to which persons are admitted for payment; but does not include any magic performance. Sub-section (5) of Section 2 defines 'institution' to include a company, society, club or other association of persons by whatever name called. 6. Subsection (4) of Section 2 of the Act defines 'entertainment' to include any exhibition, performance, amusement, game, sport or race to which persons are admitted for payment; but does not include any magic performance. Sub-section (5) of Section 2 defines 'institution' to include a company, society, club or other association of persons by whatever name called. 6. Section 3 of the Act deals with general provision regarding the levy of tax and the rate of tax. As per Section 3, any local authority may levy entertainments tax at a rate not less than 24% and not more than 48% on each price for admission to any entertainment. Going by the proviso to Section 3, the rate thus fixed shall not be lower than the sum of the entertainment tax levied under Section 3 and additional tax on entertainment levied under the Kerala Additional Tax on Entertainment and Surcharge on Show Tax Act, 1963 prevailing in the area prior to the date of commencement of the Kerala Decentralisation of Powers Act, 2000. Section 4 of the Act deals with composition and consolidated payment of tax and Section 3A inserted by the Kerala Decentralisation of Powers Act, 2000 deals with levy of entertainments tax based on seating capacity. 7. Section 7 of the Act, which deals with the power of the local authority to exempt an entertainment from payment of tax, reads thus; “7. 7. Section 7 of the Act, which deals with the power of the local authority to exempt an entertainment from payment of tax, reads thus; “7. Entertainment exempted from payment of tax.- (1) The entertainments tax shall not be levied on the price for admission to any entertainment where the local authority is satisfied.- (a) that the entertainment is of a wholly educational character; or (b) that the entertainment is provided for purposes which are wholly or partly educational, cultural or scientific by an institution not conducted or established for profit; or (c) that the entertainment is provided by an institution not conducted for profit and established solely for the purposes of promoting public health or the interests of agriculture or a manufacturing industry, and which consists solely of an exhibition of articles which are of material interest in connection with questions relating to public health or agriculture, or of the products of the industry for promoting the interests of which the institution exists or of the materials, machinery, appliances or food stuffs used in the production of those products; or (d) that the whole or the net proceeds of the entertainment is devoted to philanthropic, religious or charitable purposes.” 8. Section 7A of the Act, inserted by the Local Authorities (Amendment) Act, 1989, which deals with the power of the Government to exempt from the liability to tax, reads thus; “7A. Power to exempt.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Act, the Government may, by general or special order and for reasons to be specified in such order, exempt from liability to tax,- (a) any entertainment or class of entertainments; or (b) any or all of the entertainments provided in a place owned by the Government or a Corporation owned or controlled by the Government. (2) Any local authority concerned shall be bound to comply with any order made by the Government under sub-section (1). (3) A local authority may with the previous sanction of the Government exempt any entertainment or class of entertainments not exempted under sub-section (1) from liability to the tax.” 9. Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Act empowers the local authority to exempt any entertainment from the levy of entertainments tax, where the local authority is satisfied that such entertainment is of the nature referred to in clauses (a) to (d) thereof. Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Act empowers the local authority to exempt any entertainment from the levy of entertainments tax, where the local authority is satisfied that such entertainment is of the nature referred to in clauses (a) to (d) thereof. Therefore, the power of the local authority to grant exemption from the levy of entertainments tax is confined to entertainments of the nature referred to in clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Act. On the other hand, Section 7A of the Act, which begins with a non-obstante clause, empower the Government to exempt from the liability to tax, (a) any entertainment or class of entertainments; or (b) any or all of the entertainments provided in a place owned by the Government or a Corporation owned or controlled by the Government, by general or special order and for reasons to be specified in such order. 10. Sub-section (1) of Section 7A of the Act, therefore, mandates that any general or special order of the Government granting exemption from the levy of entertainments tax any entertainment under clause (a) or clause (b) thereof, should be supported by reasons to be specified in such order. In view of the mandate of sub-section (1) of Section 7A, it is imperative for the Government to specify reasons in any general or special order issued under the said sub-section granting exemption from the levy of tax. This is more so, when any such Government order will have an adverse impact on the revenues of the local authorities, and since the local authorities mainly depend on such sources of revenue for carrying out their obligatory duties under the relevant statutes. 11. It is well settled that, when the statute requires to do certain thing in certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. Other methods or mode of performance are impliedly and necessarily forbidden. The said proposition of law is based on a legal maxim “expressio unius est exclusion alteris” meaning thereby that, if the statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner, and following other course is not permissible. The said proposition of law is based on a legal maxim “expressio unius est exclusion alteris” meaning thereby that, if the statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner, and following other course is not permissible. The said proposition of law about limitation of exercise of statutory power has first been identified by Jassel M.R. in the case of Taylor v. Taylor (1876 (1) Ch.D. 426), wherein it was laid down that, where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, that thing must be done in that way, or not at all, and that other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden. The Privy Council applied the said principle in the case of Nazir Ahmed v. King Emperor ( AIR 1936 PC 253 ). 12. In Ajanta Industries v. Central Board of Direct Taxes ( 1976 (1) SCC 1001 ), a Three-Judge Bench of the Apex Court held that, when law requires reasons to be recorded in a particular order, affecting prejudicially the interest of any person, who can challenge the order in court, it ceases to be a mere administrative order and the wise or violation of the principles of natural justice on account of omission to communicate the reasons is not expiated. The said decision of the Apex Court was in the context of Section 127(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which empowers the Commissioner of Income Tax to transfer any case from one Income Tax Officer subordinate to him to another, also subordinate to him, after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter, wherever it is possible to do so, and after recording his reasons for doing so. After taking note of the corresponding section in the Income Tax Act, 1922, i.e., Section 5(7A), the Apex Court held that, unlike Section 5(7A) of the 1922 Act, Section 127(1) of the 1961 Act requires reasons to be recorded prior to the passing of an order of transfer. However, the impugned order does not state any reasons whatsoever for making the order of transfer. However, the impugned order does not state any reasons whatsoever for making the order of transfer. The Apex Court held that, the requirement of recording reasons under Section 127(1) of the 1961 Act is a mandatory direction under the law and non-communication thereof is not saved by showing that the reasons exist in the file although not communicated to the assessee. The Apex Court held further that, the reason for recording of reasons in the order and making those reasons known to the assessee is to enable an opportunity to the assessee to approach the High Court under its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution or even the Apex Court under Article 136 of the Constitution in an appropriate case for challenging the order, inter alia, either on the ground that it is a mala fide or arbitrary exercise or that, it is based on irrelevant and extraneous considerations. 13. In the instant case, sub-section (1) of Section 7A of the Act empower the Government to exempt an entertainment or class of entertainments, etc. from the levy entertainments tax, for reasons to be specified in the general or special order passed by the Government granting such exemption. Going by subsection (2) of Section 7A, on such general or special order being passed, the local authority concerned shall be bound to comply with such order of exemption. If the reasons stated by the Government in granting exemption from the levy of entertainments tax is vitiated by arbitrary exercise of power or based on irrelevant or extraneous considerations, it would be open to the local authority concerned to challenge the same invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In order to exercise such right efficaciously, the reasons for granting such exemption should be made known to the local authority concerned. 14. In the instant case, Ext.P2 order is in the nature of a special order issued by the Government granting exemption from the levy of entertainments tax for a Football Tournament conducted by the 1st respondent. The said order contains no reasons whatsoever for granting such exemption. 14. In the instant case, Ext.P2 order is in the nature of a special order issued by the Government granting exemption from the levy of entertainments tax for a Football Tournament conducted by the 1st respondent. The said order contains no reasons whatsoever for granting such exemption. Since Ext.P2 order does not contain any reason for exercise of such power by the Government, invoking the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 7A of the Act, conclusion is irresistible that the said order is one issued contrary to the mandate of the said sub-section and as such vitiated, which cannot be sustained in law. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside Ext.P2 Government order granting exemption from the levy of entertainments tax for the Football Tournament in question conducted by the 1st respondent. However, it is made clear that this judgment will not entitle the petitioner Grama Panchayat to demand entertainments tax from the 1st respondent for the Football Tournament in question, at this distance of time, in the absence of an order of stay against Ext.P2 granted in this Writ Petition.