Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
SC held that the Deputy Secretary's letter dated 25 September 2019 did not constitute a valid order under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The communication failed to meet statutory requirements for closure application processing. Since the appropriate Government did not communicate an order within 60 days of the application, Section 25-O(3) triggered a deemed closure. The court found the administrative action procedurally defective, as the competent authority did not apply proper mind to the closure request. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, establishing the employer's entitlement to closure as of 27 October 2019.
SC held that the Deputy Secretary's letter dated 25 September 2019 did not constitute a valid order under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The communication failed to meet statutory requirements for closure application processing. Since the appropriate Government did not communicate an order within 60 days of the application, Section 25-O(3) triggered a deemed closure. The court found the administrative action procedurally defective, as the competent authority did not apply proper mind to the closure request. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, establishing the employer's entitlement to closure as of 27 October 2019.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
