https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183077 Common ownership and administrative convenience do not, by themselves, make two industrial units one establishment under section 2-A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The decisive test is functional integrality: the units must be so interdependent that one cannot conveniently and reasonably exist without the other. Where the units are separately located, employ different workmen, manufacture different products, and maintain separate books, they remain distinct establishments. On those facts, the statutory condition for treating them as one establishment was not met, so the infancy benefit under section 16(1)(b) remained available. en-us Mon, 04 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 May 2016 15:07:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183077 Common ownership and administrative convenience do not, by themselves, make two industrial units one establishment under section 2-A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The decisive test is functional integrality: the units must be so interdependent that one cannot conveniently and reasonably exist without the other. Where the units are separately located, employ different workmen, manufacture different products, and maintain separate books, they remain distinct establishments. On those facts, the statutory condition for treating them as one establishment was not met, so the infancy benefit under section 16(1)(b) remained available. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183077