<?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>1969 (4) TMI 112 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171413</link>
    <description>A former working journalist could maintain a statutory claim under the Working Journalists Act even after termination, because the Act&#039;s definitions and remedial scheme allowed accrued rights to be enforced post-employment. A receipt described as full and final settlement did not create estoppel against leave compensation where the evidence showed the claim was separately disputed and the alleged waiver was not clearly proved. For gratuity computation, car allowance and the value of free telephone and newspapers were treated as wages because they were employer-provided benefits that reduced personal expenditure and were not shown to be mere reimbursement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2015 13:25:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=390795" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (4) TMI 112 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171413</link>
      <description>A former working journalist could maintain a statutory claim under the Working Journalists Act even after termination, because the Act&#039;s definitions and remedial scheme allowed accrued rights to be enforced post-employment. A receipt described as full and final settlement did not create estoppel against leave compensation where the evidence showed the claim was separately disputed and the alleged waiver was not clearly proved. For gratuity computation, car allowance and the value of free telephone and newspapers were treated as wages because they were employer-provided benefits that reduced personal expenditure and were not shown to be mere reimbursement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171413</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>