https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199780 Home workers rolling beedis were treated as employees for provident fund purposes because the definition of employee was read broadly to cover persons engaged directly or through contractors in connection with an establishment. The manufacturer's supply of raw material, collection of finished beedis, maintenance of registers, and right to reject substandard work were treated as sufficient control and supervision for an employment relationship. The absence of a fixed superannuation age did not prevent the Act and Scheme from applying to home workers, since retirement-linked provident fund benefits were capable of operating without an express retirement age. The constitutional challenge based on financial burden and Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 31 was rejected. en-us Wed, 25 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:27:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199780 Home workers rolling beedis were treated as employees for provident fund purposes because the definition of employee was read broadly to cover persons engaged directly or through contractors in connection with an establishment. The manufacturer's supply of raw material, collection of finished beedis, maintenance of registers, and right to reject substandard work were treated as sufficient control and supervision for an employment relationship. The absence of a fixed superannuation age did not prevent the Act and Scheme from applying to home workers, since retirement-linked provident fund benefits were capable of operating without an express retirement age. The constitutional challenge based on financial burden and Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 31 was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 25 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199780