<?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>1994 (7) TMI 375 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303502</link>
    <description>The Karnataka HC held that the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board qualified as a local authority for purposes of Section 32(iv) of the Payment of Bonus Act because it had separate corporate existence, defined territorial jurisdiction, civic functions, and power to raise and manage funds; its employees in the relevant establishments were therefore exempt from bonus under that provision. The Court also rejected the Article 14 challenge, finding that employees of a local authority running a public utility industry formed a distinct class with an intelligible differentia and a rational nexus to the Act&#039;s object of sharing prosperity and maintaining industrial harmony. The statutory exemption was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2022 10:21:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=686217" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (7) TMI 375 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303502</link>
      <description>The Karnataka HC held that the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board qualified as a local authority for purposes of Section 32(iv) of the Payment of Bonus Act because it had separate corporate existence, defined territorial jurisdiction, civic functions, and power to raise and manage funds; its employees in the relevant establishments were therefore exempt from bonus under that provision. The Court also rejected the Article 14 challenge, finding that employees of a local authority running a public utility industry formed a distinct class with an intelligible differentia and a rational nexus to the Act&#039;s object of sharing prosperity and maintaining industrial harmony. The statutory exemption was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303502</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>