TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether compensation awarded to workmen on closure of the factory could be treated as wages in respect of services rendered so as to claim preferential payment under section 230(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 1913, and whether the Collector's attachment for recovery of that amount was valid.
Analysis: The preferential payment scheme under section 230 of the Companies Act, 1913 applies only to wages for services rendered within the relevant two-month period before the commencement of winding up. The amount awarded by the Industrial Tribunal was not remuneration for work actually done, but compensation for closure calculated by reference to length of service. The Court distinguished such compensation from wages and treated it as an ex gratia payment dehors the contract of service. It further held that the broader definitions of wages in other labour statutes could not control the narrower language of section 230(1)(c), which is confined to wages in respect of services rendered.
Conclusion: The compensation was not entitled to preferential treatment under section 230(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 1913, and the attachment made by the Collector was without jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi: For priority in winding up under section 230(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 1913, the claim must be wages actually earned for services rendered within the statutory period, and compensation payable on closure or termination of employment does not qualify.
TaxTMI 
