Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act to not apply where employees abandon their service, and more

Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act will not be applicable to employees who voluntarily abandon their service: SC

In Manju Saxena v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India (“SC”) reiterated that if an employee abandons service voluntarily then they will not be covered under the ambit of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act (“ID Act”) 1947, which provides for condition precedents for retrenchment of workmen.

Continuous Service is a condition precedent for protection against the retrenchment of workmen under the ID Act, as stated in Section 25F of the ID Act. The SC held that voluntary abandonment of service by the employee would mean that there was no “Continuous Service” as per the definition provided under Section 2(oo) of the ID Act and that would render the retrenchment valid as per provisions of law.

In the present case, the petitioner refused to take up four alternative positions offered by the Employer and during the course of conciliation; she only claimed for enhancement of compensation and not reinstatement which was held by the Delhi High Court as abandonment of service. The SC upheld the view taken by the Delhi High Court.

GameChanger Views:

  • We believe that this case has reaffirmed the position of law on retrenchment of workmen under Section 25F of the ID Act, 1947 stating that if there is abandonment of service then Section 25F will not be applicable. More importantly, the case held that refusal to choose from the alternative position offered by the employer would also be deemed as abandonment.

E-Commerce companies to not collect the tax from suppliers with annual turnover less than Rs 20 Lakhs

Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (“CBIC”) issued a clarification on tax collected at source (“TCS”) collected under GST on 30th November, 2018 stating that E-commerce entities will not be collecting TCS from the suppliers whose annual turnover is less than INR 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Only) and are not registered under GST.

CBIC clarified that since these suppliers’ annual turnover is less than INR 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Only), they are exempted from registration under GST regime and therefore will also be not liable to pay the TCS to e-commerce entities through which they supply the products.

Additionally, CBIC also stated that the e-commerce entities who failed to register themselves on GST portal but have already collected TCS, can show the amount collected to the authorities through filing of first return form GSTR-8.

GameChanger Views:

  • We believe that by issuing this clarification, the CBIC is making the tax collection process easier for the e-commerce entities. The much-needed clarification provides for a classification of suppliers which was absent earlier. This lack of classification earlier, made the e-commerce entities to collect TCS even from the suppliers who were not registered under GST regime.

Government, RBI looking to introduce QR code AADHAAR for electronic-know your customer purpose (“e-KYC”)

Central Government and Reserve Bank of India (“RBI”) are finding new alternatives of AADHAAR after it has been held not mandatory for opening a bank account or buying a sim-card from a telecom company by the SC.

The SC rejected the use of biometrics through AADHAAR for e-KYC which has made the user verification tougher for banks and telecom companies. In October, Payments Council of India (“PCI”) requested RBI to provide for an alternative to AADHAAR as the new method of user verification was costlier and time consuming. Government and RBI have come up with the idea of offline AADHAAR which will use QR codes to identify individuals instead of the biometrics.

UIDAI has also suggested RBI to amend the KYC master circular to bring it in compliance with the SC judgment on AADHAAR.

GameChanger Views:

  • We believe that this is a good step taken by the Government and RBI as it will make the user verification process hassle-free for the banks and telecom companies. The move will also see support from people as they will not have to share their personal information like biometrics for identification and verification purposes.

Disclaimer

As per rules of the Bar Council of India, advocates are not permitted to solicit work or advertise. By clicking on the “I agree” button below and accessing this website, the User acknowledges that by accessing this website (www.gamechangerlaw.com):