Associate R
04 March 2010 at 13:21
One of my client who is an employee was working in 2nd shift from 3.00 pm. At 8.00 pm the employer found that alchohol smell is coming and took the blood and sent for test next day to Medical Officer, though there was Central Hospital, ESIS Hospital was available. No liquor bottle found in the company nor the employee went outside from the time of his duty. The security checked the employee before letting him inside the company for duty. How far the case of an employer is correct? When the worker was covered under ESIC, they took test from Medical Officer.
My query is that what is the procedure to take test of blood, how blood samples to be sealed, which is the right authority to test the blood samples?
Pl. help me in this regard with any judgments, if any.
Thanks in Advance!
Regards
Annapurna
Associate R
04 March 2010 at 13:14
One of my client who is an employee was working in 2nd shift from 3.00 pm. At 8.00 pm the employer found that alchohol smell is coming and took the blood and sent for test next day to Medical Officer, though there was Central Hospital, ESIS Hospital was available. The worker was covered under ESIC. My query is that what is the procedure to take test of blood, how blood samples to be sealed, which is the right authority to test the blood samples?
Pl. help me in this regard with any judgments, if any.
Thanks in Advance!
Regards
Annapurna
Heaven 2011
04 March 2010 at 11:24
Respected all,
I have opined in a specific case regrading offence under section 297 of the Companies Act that releif under section 633 may be available to the concerned director. While no exemption of Section 297 even were applicable to the concerned case i find it better to take shelter u/s 633. If it is proved subject to having appropriate evidence that the default on the part of the Director was not intentional and that the director has acted honestly to avoid the offence, can he get relief? Or if a back dated resignation prior to the occurence of the offence can be shown subject to filing the form 32 in current date with fine would the resignation act as relief? Kindly advice.
Rgds,
Asish
Sumita
04 March 2010 at 11:23
respected all experts,
kindly give me ans this quary:
the provision of punishment has been described in Indian Penal Code but only one punishment is described in Cr.P.C.which one & related sec.?? this Q.has been asked in ADPO(UP.)exam -interview .
niraj
04 March 2010 at 10:46
my grandfather has 4 son & 2 daughters, earlier my 2 uncles were patritioned & agreed that they have no part in my grandfathers property & also 2 daughters are agreed that after marriage what will law says in this case whether my 2 uncles & 2 uncle sister can claim right of property of my grandfather after agreed that they have no right in stamp paper ?
please advice me
James
04 March 2010 at 10:39
Hello Experts,,
Plz suggest me regarding two queries:-
1) My income is taxable since the last three years.But I had not filled returns Although TDS were deducted on most occasions but not all.
So if I file my return now will I have to pay any penalty?If yes, then at what rate & is there any way to avoid that??
2)I'm salaried employee & So as I know I can get an exemption upto 1.6L & another 1L for investments.Now is there any other means by which I can get exemption on income above that(considering all my income is from salary only).
Anthony Mathias
04 March 2010 at 10:34
The Trade& Merchandise Marks Act 1958 has been repealed by the Trade Marks Act 1999. There is a saving in the Trade Marks Act 1999 keeping all notifications that were issued under the T&MM Act 1958 alive if they were in existance on the date of repeal of this act corresponding to similar provision under the new act. Has Notification S.O 1272 dated 25th April 1962 been rescinded rather has any notification been issued under section 139 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 altering the status of this Notification in respect of export of goods.
Section 71 of the Geographical Indication of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act 1999 empowers the Govt to prescribe conditions similar to section 117 of the T&MM Act 1999. Has any notification been issued under this section by the Govt. altering the situation in respect of export of goods
Anonymous
04 March 2010 at 09:16
We, a private limited company having regd. office at Delhi and Head Office at Ghaziabad, filing our return of income for last 12 years at Ghaziabad from head office address. Returns of income were also processed u/s 143(1) at Ghaziabad. Return of income for the A Y 2006-07 mentioning therein address of Ghaziabad was submited electronically. The case was selected for scrutiny under (CASS). Necessary notice u/s 143(2) was issued but by ITO of Delhi. No notice was received by the company or any of its director. A final notice was issued by Delhi ITO on the directors of the company which was also received but on the date of hearing itself. Hence it was not possible to appear on the date fixed. Order u/s 144 was passed by Delhi ITO adding all the amount of share capital, unsecured loans and 20% of sales. There was no fresh share capital issued or unsecured loan received during the year under question. We are now in appeal with CIT challenging the jurisdiction of the Delhi ITO. Delhi ITO is saying that he has the jurisdiction over case due to our address available with IT PAN Data base which is of our regd. office at Delhi. Let me know what cource of action is best in this case.
Anonymous
04 March 2010 at 09:00
We, a private Limted company, sold certain shares in other closely held companies which were held as investment. Sales consideration was received through cheques. The investigation deptt of I Tax, find that the purchaser companies were entry operator. The directors of the purchaser companies also accepted and given oath that no real transaction was entered into by their companies. Their denial was general in nature not to a particular transaction. Our case was opened u/s 148. We have submitted the purchaser's confirmation, their IT details but AO has added all consideration received on account of sale of shares held as investment u/s 68 of the IT Act. Now we are in appeal with CIT. Let me know what we have to do now. Is there any case law decided which will go in our favor. I appeal we taken the view that sec. 68 is not applicable in our case as we have not received any sum on account of cash credit, share capital, unsecured loan or share application money rather it is case of sale of investment.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
sucession certificate
my mother was bearing kisan vikas patra from Dehradun head post office the name of nominee was of my younger brother but he never cared of her hence she made a registered will in favour of me. on the basis of said will i was awarded sucession certificate/porobate by the court. on the basis of same order i approched post office they declined to act on sucession certificate rather they insisted me to call the nominee now request to show what i should do and how to proceed further is laid.
yours
sanjay sharma