Sunday, May 10, 2015

[aaykarbhavan] source Business standard



 

BRIEF CASE

 

No notice to directors in cheque bounce cases


supposed to know about the dishonour when the company gets the notice. There is sufficient time, nearly 75 days, to find which directors are responsible for the fault and therefore, there is no need to prolong the process by serving notices on each director or partner. The Supreme Court overruled the Bombay High Court which had maintained that separate notices were essential. Allowing the appeal case, Kirshna Texport & Capital Markets Ltd vs Ila Agrawal, the court asked the high court to reconsider its view regarding the trial of two directors. Analysing Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the court said: " There is nothing in Section 138 which may even remotely suggest issuance of notice to anyone other than the drawer ( the company)… Section 141 again does not lay down any requirement that the directors must individually be issued separate notices. The persons running the affairs must naturally be aware of the notice issued to such company. It is precisely for this reason that no notice is additionally contemplated to be given to such directors."

Decoding the new labour code


NAMRATA ACHARYA

In 2002, the Second Commission on Labour Laws proposed radical changes in the country's labour laws to then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Among other proposals, the commission suggested labour laws be broadly grouped into segments pertaining to 1) industrial relations 2) wages 3) social security 4) safety and 5) welfare and working conditions.

It took nearly 13 years for the government to give the recommendation careful thought.

Now, the Union government plans to replace 44 laws with five codes relating to wages, industrial relations, small factories, social security and welfare. It is in the preliminary stages of discussions with stakeholders from the Centre and states on wage and industrial relation codes. The proposals in these two codes contain some radical changes, which could reshape labourmanagement ties in India.

Wage code

A unified wage code broadly merges four Acts — the Minimum Wages Act, the Payment of Wages Act, the Payment of Bonus Act and the Equal Remuneration Act into a comprehensive code. Each of these laws defines wages differently.

The code, however, has a uniform definition, as stipulated by the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.

"For most disputes, wage is the centre point. The idea is no sacrifice is being made in the objectives of the four laws, while retaining all in one code," said an official of the West Bengal labour department.

The new code does away with the concept of a ' scheduled list' of employment, used to set minimum wages for different employments under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.

Earlier, if any new employment was to be added to the list by the Centre or state governments, it had to be done through a process of notification.

The proposed code, while removing the scheduled list, gives state governments the power to fix the minimum wage for any employment. States can revise from time to time, taking into the consideration the guidelines of the Minimum Wages Advisory Board.

The new code also enhances penal provisions for employers.

The Minimum Wages Act, 1948, imposes a paltry ₹ 500 as penalty for any violation of the Act's provisions by an employer.

The wage code provides for apenalty of up to ₹ 50,000 for the first violation, and ₹ 1 lakh for the second, along with a provision for imprisonment for three months. The code also does away with the labour inspector and replaces the post with a facilitator. The facilitator could be from varied fields, including trade unions and welfare societies, says a government official.

Industrial relations code

The code on industrial relations amalgamates the Trade Unions Act, 1926, the Industrial Employment ( Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Under the code, factories employing more than 50 but less than 300 workers do not need the government's permission for layoffs, retrenchment or closure of a factory. Earlier, the limit was 100 workers.

The code is silent on the procedure of closing factories employing less than 50 workers.

Also, it is applicable to industrial establishments of aseasonal nature, where work is intermittent.

It is expected a separate code on small factories will lay down the procedure for closure or lay- offs in the case of small factories, with up to 50 workers.

Some earlier Bills presented by the government have already clarified the government will keep small factories out of the purview of major laws, as spelt out in the Small Factories ( Regulation of Employment and Condition of Services) Bill, 2014. A total of 14 laws governing factories will not be applicable to law proposed for small factories.

"In India, 58 per cent of the factories employ up to 30 workers.

Also, more than 120 million work in small- scale industries, while the number of workers in large- scale industries is only 12.5 million. Thus, the proposed labour code will hugely benefit the manufacturing sector," said N G Khaitan, partner in law firm Khaitan & Co.

The industrial relations code further says factories with 50- 300 workers must give a 60- day notice before closing any unit.

Also, the code curtails freedom to form trade unions.

Earlier, at least seven people could form a trade union; now, at least 100 employees or 10 per cent of the workers are needed to form a union. In case 10 per cent of the workers in a unit number less than seven, the workers will have to make an application for registration.

Most provisions of the code have already been applied by the Rajasthan government. "After the law easing retrenchment was applied in Rajasthan, of the 13,000 factories in the state, only 256 are under the ambit of the new laws. The code does not provide any protection to workers in small factories," says Brajesh Upadhyay, general- secretary of the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh.

Even as opinions differ, labour reforms are expected to be cited as the top achievement of the National Democratic Alliance government as it completes ayear in office.

Salient provisions of the labour code on wages

|Removes the concept of scheduled list and inspectors |States empowered to fix minimum wages |State governments shall review or revise minimum rates of wages at intervals not exceeding five years, if the minimum wage has a component of variable dearness allowance |The wage code provides for penalty of up to ~ 50,000 for first violation, against the current ~ 500

Salient provisions of labour code on industrial relations

|For factories employing more than 50 but less than 300 workers, government permission isn't needed for lay- offs, retrenchment or closure of a unit |Factories with 50- 300 workers must give a 60- day notice before closing any unit |Now, 10 per cent of the employees or 100 workers are needed to form a trade union |In the case of any industry in which at least 100 workers are employed or have been employed on any day in the preceding 12 months, the employer will constitute a works committee A SHOT IN THE ARM

Decoding the new labour code

 

 

BRIEF CASE



 Sterilisation does not attract excise

Hoechst Marion Roussel Ltd. The excise department demanded duty calling them new products after sterilisation. The firm denied that the process brought about a new product, the duty on which had already been paid once. However, the excise appellate tribunal held that " an article with distinct brand name and separate end use/ quality has emerged by the activity undertaken." The firm appealed to the Supreme Court against this ruling. Allowing the appeal, the court stated that " the added process of sterilisation does not mean that such articles are not complete articles in themselves or that the process of sterilisation produces a transformation in the original articles leading to new articles known to the market as such. A surgical equipment such as a knife continues to be a surgical knife even after sterilisation. If the department were right, every time such instruments are sterilised, the same surgical instrument is brought forth again and again by way of manufacture and excisable duty is chargeable on the same. This would lead to an absurd result and fly in the face of common sense."

Corporation for supply of power. Later, it entered into a supply agreement with Konark with a higher rate. While this was pending, Konark filed an application before the regulatory commission pointing out the rise in cost of raw materials and the need to revise the PPA to a higher rate for power generation. The commission claimed it had the power to grant the request. The tribunal also stated so, because power generators should not suffer unnecessarily. The tribunal asked supplier to go before the commission and convince it the need for revision in tariff. Therefore, it appealed to the Supreme Court. In its judgment, the court stated that both the commission and the tribunal were wrong regarding the power of the commission. Whatever terms agreed to must continue to remain in force without alteration for at least ten years. The court also ruled that the state commission had no power under the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission ( Power Procurement) Regulations to vary the tariff agreed between the parties under the approved PPA.

 Liaison firm free from service tax

forwarding agent", and therefore no service tax could be demanded from them. In this case, Coal Handlers Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise, the issue was whether such services provided under contract would label them as clearing & forwarding agents and thus make them liable to pay service tax. The private firm was providing certain services as agent to the then state companies, Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd and Ambuja Cements Eastern Ltd. The court found that the contract was merely for procuring or booking orders from coal companies for the principal Ambuja companies on payment of commission and that would not amount to providing services as " clearing and forwarding agent". The primary job of Coal Handlers is supervising and liaisoning with the coal company as well the railways to see that the material required by Ambuja companies is loaded as per the schedule. Therefore, they are not liable to pay service tax.

LCDs not to pay Customs duty

authorities. Since these LCD devices are used for electronic supply meters, the revenue authorities took the view that it would fall in a category which attracted duty. Analysing the provisions, the court ruled that the goods were free from basic Customs duty.

A weekly selection of key court orders

 

 

--




A.Rengarajan
Practising  Company  Secretary
Chennai


Mobile 93810  11200

"
LET  US  SUPPORT  COMPANY  SECRETARY  BENEVOLENT  FUND  FOR  COMMON  CAUSE




__._,_.___

Posted by: CS A Rengarajan <csarengarajan@gmail.com>


receive alert on mobile, subscribe to SMS Channel named "aaykarbhavan"
[COST FREE]
SEND "on aaykarbhavan" TO 9870807070 FROM YOUR MOBILE.

To receive the mails from this group send message to aaykarbhavan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com





__,_._,___

No comments:

Post a Comment