REGAL FASHIONS Vs. REGIONAL PF COMMISSIONER ENFORCEMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, the petitioner has sought for setting aside the order dated 5-7-2007 at Annexure-K passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi and also to set aside the order of the first respondent dated 3-9-2001 at Annexure-G and for such other reliefs.

(2.) The prayer to declare paragraph 32-A of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 as ultra vires the provision of Section 5 and Section 14-B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 is given up by the learned counsel for the petitioner in view of the amendment brought to the EPF Employees Pension (II Amendment Scheme) 2008.

(3.) As it transpires, the petitioner commenced manufacturing and exporting business on 10-6-1996. Thereafter, alleging nondisclosure and non-payment of the EPF contribution towards coverage for the employees, the first respondent sent a letter dated 3-9-2001 through RPAD as per Annexure-G asking them to pay damages of Rs. 79,739/- in respect of Account No. 1, Rs. 11,452/- in respect of Account No. 2, Rs. 1,21,539/- in respect of Account No. 10, Rs. 7,295/- in respect of Account No. 21 and Rs. 146/- in respect of Account No. 22 under the head 'Penal Damages' for the period from 1997-98 to 1999-2000. Stating that the petitioner is not liable to make payment of contribution since they were entitled to infancy protection as provided under Section 16(1)(d) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, prior to the amendment, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal by its order at Annexure-K, has opined that the appellant cannot escape its liability to pay damages solely on the ground that the code number was allotted retrospectively. Hence, this petition, challenging the order to pay damages as well as the order of the Appellate Tribunal confirming the order of the Commissioner to make contribution.