<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1996 (9) TMI 503 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103338</link>
    <description>In a company-owned factory, the occupier under section 2(n) of the Factories Act, 1948 must be one of the company&#039;s directors, because ultimate control rests with the board and the company cannot nominate another employee or officer. The proviso deeming a director to be the occupier was held to give workable effect to the statutory scheme and to support enforcement of the Act&#039;s health and safety obligations. It was also found to be intra vires and constitutionally valid, with no violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) or 21, since it has a direct nexus with preventing evasion of responsibility and ensuring strict statutory liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140377" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (9) TMI 503 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103338</link>
      <description>In a company-owned factory, the occupier under section 2(n) of the Factories Act, 1948 must be one of the company&#039;s directors, because ultimate control rests with the board and the company cannot nominate another employee or officer. The proviso deeming a director to be the occupier was held to give workable effect to the statutory scheme and to support enforcement of the Act&#039;s health and safety obligations. It was also found to be intra vires and constitutionally valid, with no violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) or 21, since it has a direct nexus with preventing evasion of responsibility and ensuring strict statutory liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103338</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>