De. Labochem (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ors. - Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Decided on: Jan-08-2002

Court: Kolkata

LAW: Section 7-A of Employees', Section 7-A, Section 19-A of the 1952 Act, Section 7-A, Section 7-A, Section 19-A, Section 19-A., Section 7-A, Section 19-A., Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 19-A, Section 7-A, The Question 4, Section 1, Section 16, Section 19-A, Section 19-A, Section 16, Section 7-A., Section 19-A, the Section 7-A, Section 19-A, Act 33 of 1988, Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 7, Act 33 of 1988, Act 33 of 1988, Section 19-A, Section 20, Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 6, Section 6, Central Act or, Section 6 of 1897 Act, Section 6 of 1897 Act, Section 6, Section 6, Section 6, Section 6, Section 6, Section 6, Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 19-A of the 1952 Act, Section 19-A, Section 20, Section 19-A, Section 7-A through Act 33 of 1988, Section 19-A, Section 7-A., Section 19-A, Act 33 of 1988, Section 7-A, Section 7-A, Section 7-A, Section 19-A, Section 7-A.9, Section 6 of 1897 Act, Section 6, Section 6, Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 19-A and Section 7-A, Act 33 of 1988, Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 6, Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 7-A of the 1952 Act.12, Section 7-A, Section 7-A., Section 19-A, Section 7-A., Section 7-A., Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 7-A, Act 33 of 1988, Section 19-A, Section 7-A, Section 7-A

PERSON: D.K. Seth, J.Facts:1, Anr, Anil Kumar Gupta, Ghosh, Mohindra Singh, Harbhajan Karu, Rule, Hemaji Hiraman Bakde, Law, Lal Bani Ram Jain, Glass Works, S.P. Singh, Mohar Singh, Indira Sohan Lal v. Custodian Evacuee, Law, Law, Law, Singhal Dal Mill v., Firm Sheo, Nasib Singh, Bajo Ram, Heydon, Heydon, Baliram Wanian Hiray, Justice B. Lentin, CFI Patiala, Haryana, Ghosh, Gupta, Ghosh, v. T. S. Hariharan, Ghosh, Hyderabad 1964

DATE: February 2, 1980, 1952, February 19, 1980, 1988, March 6, 1980, 1974, 1988, three years, five years, 1979, 1974, five years, 1979, less than 60 days, three years, 60 days, 60 days, five years, three years, August 1, 1988, 21, 22, 1963, November 30, 1963, August 1, 1988, 21, August 1, 1988, 1897, 1967]65ITR656(SC, 1971, 1955, 21, 22, 21, 1969, 1584, 1584, 1897, the year, less than 60 days, the year, three years, five years, a period of, six months

MONEY: 1952 Act

ORG: the Regional Provident Fund, the Central Provident Fund, RPFC, FLR 248, Learned Counsel, Learned Counsel, the Central Government, the High Court, the Central Government, the Central Government, Interpretation of Amended, Ekambarappa v. Excess Profits Tax Officer, Section, Sections, the Central Government, J & K 9, Court, Heydon, Court, the Bengal Immunity Co., S.R. DAS, Apex Court, Shahzada Nand & Son, Goodyear India Ltd., State of, Legislature, Legislature, the Central Government, Provident Fund, the Punjab & Haryana High Court, Nazeena Traders, Regional Provident Fund, Regional Provident Fund, the Apex Court, the Punjab & Haryana High Court, Xerox

CARDINAL: 7A, 28, 3, 20, 50, 20, less than 50, 2, 32, 50, 2, 50, 22, 1897.Method, 2, 307, 88, 1955]2SCR1117, 514, 3, 637, four, 1955]2SCR603, 1989]176ITR1(SC, 1966]60ITR392(SC, 1991]188ITR402(SC, two, two, two, one, two, one, 1971)ILLJ416SC, 29, 277

GPE: Clause, England, Guntur

EVENT: General Clauses Act, SC 84

TIME: 22 through Act 33 of 1988

WORK_OF_ART: Laws and Laws, Tip Top Dry Cleaners & Dyers v. Union of India