<?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>2009 (8) TMI 1221 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194049</link>
    <description>A voluntary retirement provision granting five years&#039; notional service could not be used to create eligibility for pension where the employee had retired before the pension scheme commenced and had not completed the qualifying service required by the regulations. The definition of qualifying service was read restrictively, covering only actual or statutorily recognized service, and the word &quot;otherwise&quot; was construed in context and not as a broad extension of eligibility. Clause (5) was held to operate only after qualifying service was already satisfied, for computation of enhanced benefits, and not to deem additional service for the purpose of meeting the minimum threshold. The pension claim on that basis therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Aug 2017 13:32:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=487026" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 1221 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194049</link>
      <description>A voluntary retirement provision granting five years&#039; notional service could not be used to create eligibility for pension where the employee had retired before the pension scheme commenced and had not completed the qualifying service required by the regulations. The definition of qualifying service was read restrictively, covering only actual or statutorily recognized service, and the word &quot;otherwise&quot; was construed in context and not as a broad extension of eligibility. Clause (5) was held to operate only after qualifying service was already satisfied, for computation of enhanced benefits, and not to deem additional service for the purpose of meeting the minimum threshold. The pension claim on that basis therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>