Skip to main content

Meaning of 'grocery' extended

The term 'grocery' would include soft drinks and bottled water, not merely food items, the Supreme Court stated extending the meaning of the word grocery. This interpretation would benefit manual labourers in Maharashtra, as the court has dismissed the appeal, PepsiCo India Holding P Ltd vs Grocery Market & Shops Board, against the Bombay high court judgment. The loaders got only wages and were deprived of provident fund contribution, paid holidays, house rent, workmen's compensation, bonus and other medical benefits. It was to protect such workers that the welfare legislation titled Maharashtra Manual Workers Welfare Act and a scheme were introduced. When the authorities applied the law to PepsiCo, which produces soft drinks like Pepsi, Mirinda, 7 Up and mineral water, it objected to it and moved the Bombay high court. PepsiCo's argument was that the expression grocery would only comprise articles, which are required as daily necessities such as oil and grain in households, and not soft drinks. The high court dismissed the petition stating that "now-a-days, soft drinks are available in the grocery shops and supermarkets. They are items of food and, therefore, they are all grocery items. In all the manufacturing process, loading and unloading activities are carried out, which are the activities of the manual workers." The Supreme Court upheld this view to the benefit of manual workers.

Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/tangle-over-withdrawal-of-incentives-116022100751_1.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/
Post a Comment
Read more

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...
Post a Comment
Read more