Skip to content


iron and Metal Traders Pvt. Ltd., Bombay Vs. M.S. Haskiel and anr. Etc. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectLabour and Industrial
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Appeals Nos. 1521 (NL) and 1522 (NL) of 1978
Judge
Reported inAIR1984SC629; 1984LabIC182; (1983)IILLJ504SC; 1983(2)SCALE391; (1984)1SCC304
Appellantiron and Metal Traders Pvt. Ltd., Bombay;bombay Metal and Alloys Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Bomb
RespondentM.S. Haskiel and anr. Etc.;l.F. Crasto and ors.
Excerpt:
.....appeal and its application for condoning the delay in filing the returns in question. the tribunal held that the company was not entitled to the benefit of carrying forward the losses as it had not filed the returns in accordance with s. 22(2a) of the act. the high court, in reference, held that a voluntary return showing loss could be validly filed at any time before assessment was made on the strength of the provision in s. 22(3) of the act and the assessee was entitled to have such loss carried 'forward under s. 24(2). the commissioner of income-tax appealed to this court, held: per hegde and grover, jj.-the appeal must be dismissed. (i) in view of this court's decision in ranchhoddas karsondas's case the income-tax officer could not have ignored the returns and had to..........with reference to reinstatement of three workmen and backwages for 7 other workmen who are refused relief of reinstatement. mr. bhandare, learned counsel vehemently argued that the approach of the tribunal in ordering reinstatement was neither legal nor judicially correct. we heard him and we also looked into the documents which he wanted us to see. we are in agreement with the finding of the industrial tribunal that this is a case of discrimination in dealing with the cases of these appellants workmen involved in these two appeals in as much many strikers were reinstated but these respondents were singled out for drastic treatment. the tribunal ordered reinstatement of three workers and awarded compensation to seven in lieu of relief of reinstatement. the approach of the tribunal is.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. We heard Mr. M. C. Bhandare, learned Counsel for the appellants in both the appeals. The disputes involved in these two appeals are with reference to reinstatement of three workmen and backwages for 7 other workmen who are refused relief of reinstatement. Mr. Bhandare, learned Counsel vehemently argued that the approach of the Tribunal in ordering reinstatement was neither legal nor judicially correct. We heard him and we also looked into the documents which he wanted us to see. We are in agreement with the finding of the Industrial Tribunal that this is a case of discrimination in dealing with the cases of these appellants workmen involved in these two appeals in as much many strikers were reinstated but these respondents were singled out for drastic treatment. The Tribunal ordered reinstatement of three workers and awarded compensation to seven in lieu of relief of reinstatement. The approach of the Tribunal is fair, just and reasonable. We therefore, see no justification for interfering with the award of the Tribunal in respect of these workmen in the dispute. We accordingly dismiss both the appeals with costs quantified at Rs. 1,000/- in respect of each workman respondent in each of these appeals.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //