<?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 (9) TMI 1072 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308736</link>
    <description>The EPF Scheme&#039;s reference to filing within 15 days of the close of every month was read with the Act and the Payment of Wages Act to mean the wage month adopted by the employer, not a compulsory British calendar month. Because the statute does not define &quot;wage month&quot; or require a calendar-month basis, an employer may fix a wage period up to one month, and the contribution obligation follows the close of that wage month when wages are earned and payable. Administrative forms and accounting statements were treated as aids only. Damages could not be sustained merely because deposits were not aligned with the British calendar month.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2023 16:22:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=719765" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 1072 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308736</link>
      <description>The EPF Scheme&#039;s reference to filing within 15 days of the close of every month was read with the Act and the Payment of Wages Act to mean the wage month adopted by the employer, not a compulsory British calendar month. Because the statute does not define &quot;wage month&quot; or require a calendar-month basis, an employer may fix a wage period up to one month, and the contribution obligation follows the close of that wage month when wages are earned and payable. Administrative forms and accounting statements were treated as aids only. Damages could not be sustained merely because deposits were not aligned with the British calendar month.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308736</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>