https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299391 Section 10 of the Bonus Act was upheld as a reasonable restriction in public interest, even though it required payment of the statutory minimum bonus in years of loss. The constitutional challenge under Articles 19(1)(g) and 301 failed because the Court treated the obligation as consistent with constitutional policy, with the Directive Principles informing the reasonableness of the legislative measure rather than rendering it an impermissible burden on business or trade. en-us Thu, 16 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:11:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299391 Section 10 of the Bonus Act was upheld as a reasonable restriction in public interest, even though it required payment of the statutory minimum bonus in years of loss. The constitutional challenge under Articles 19(1)(g) and 301 failed because the Court treated the obligation as consistent with constitutional policy, with the Directive Principles informing the reasonableness of the legislative measure rather than rendering it an impermissible burden on business or trade. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299391