<?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>1967 (8) TMI 116 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157481</link>
    <description>A contract-based transport arrangement was treated as lawful where former drivers voluntarily resigned and then operated as independent hirers under agreed terms. The commentary states that this did not amount to coercion, victimisation, unfair labour practice, or exploitation, because the operators were free agents and not used through a labour-suppressing intermediary. It also notes that the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 applied to employees kept in service, not to independent operators outside the statutory definition. The arrangement was therefore described as not defeating the Act, and the broader principle stated is that a business model is permissible if it does not contravene any statute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174504" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (8) TMI 116 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157481</link>
      <description>A contract-based transport arrangement was treated as lawful where former drivers voluntarily resigned and then operated as independent hirers under agreed terms. The commentary states that this did not amount to coercion, victimisation, unfair labour practice, or exploitation, because the operators were free agents and not used through a labour-suppressing intermediary. It also notes that the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 applied to employees kept in service, not to independent operators outside the statutory definition. The arrangement was therefore described as not defeating the Act, and the broader principle stated is that a business model is permissible if it does not contravene any statute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157481</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>