<?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>1973 (9) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180612</link>
    <description>The definition of &quot;person employed&quot; under the Andhra Pradesh (Telengana Area) Shops and Establishments Act, 1951 was read broadly to include workers wholly or principally engaged in a shop&#039;s business. The traditional control test was held to be important but not the sole test for a contract of service, especially in skilled work. Relevant factors included attendance at the employer&#039;s premises, use of the employer&#039;s machines, piece-rate payment, instructions on stitching, and the right to reject defective work and require redoing. Taken together, these factors showed sufficient supervision and integration into the business, supporting an employer-employee relationship and application of the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 15:45:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=421849" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1973 (9) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180612</link>
      <description>The definition of &quot;person employed&quot; under the Andhra Pradesh (Telengana Area) Shops and Establishments Act, 1951 was read broadly to include workers wholly or principally engaged in a shop&#039;s business. The traditional control test was held to be important but not the sole test for a contract of service, especially in skilled work. Relevant factors included attendance at the employer&#039;s premises, use of the employer&#039;s machines, piece-rate payment, instructions on stitching, and the right to reject defective work and require redoing. Taken together, these factors showed sufficient supervision and integration into the business, supporting an employer-employee relationship and application of the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180612</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>