Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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.