VEERABHOOMI TOURIST Vs. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent No.1- Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner passed an order on 21.06.2018 under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952, demanding about Rs.15,35,199/- and directed the petitioner to remit the said amount for the purpose of contribution and administrative charges towards Provident Fund and Insurance Fund for the period March, 2010 to July, 2015. This order was addressed to M/s. Veerabhoomi Tourist Village (P) Ltd., PB No.11, Kutta PO, Kushalnagar, South Coorg. This order was not communicated to the petitioner since no such establishment was there in the said place that order was transmitted and he had no knowledge of the said order. The petitioner came to know the said order only when his establishment was attached on 30.11.2018. Hence, he preferred an appeal before the CGIT, Bengaluru. The same came to be rejected on the ground of delay. The learned Tribunal assigned the reason that under the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1997, the Tribunal could only condone the delay for a period of 60 days beyond limitation of 60 days. Whereas according to the Tribunal, the appeal was filed on 185th day of the order. Accordingly, it was rejected.

(2.) It is the submission of the learned counsel that the impugned order itself was not served on the petitioner, since the order was forwarded to the different establishment where establishment was not there. Hence the Tribunal should condone the delay considering the delay by the date of attachment order dated 30.11.2018. Hence, the order of the Tribunal is to be set aside and appeal is to be restored to file.

(3.) The submissions have been examined and also perused the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1. It is found that as per the affidavit filed before the CGIT, the address of the appellant has been referred as "PB No.11, Kutta PO, Kushalnagar, South Coorg" but the demand was not served on the registered address of the petitioner. The registered address is "M/s. Veerabhoomi Tourist Village(P) LTd., Kudlur Village, Kushalnagar, Coorg-571234", whereas the order passed by the respondent No.1 has been served on "M/s. Veerabhoomi Tourist Village (P) Ltd., PB No.11, Kutta PO, Kushalnagar, South Coorg", apparently to a wrong address. In the cases of this nature, when the impugned order has been forwarded to the different address other than the registered address, the date of knowledge is to be counted. In the instant case, the appellant came to know the order of the Tribunal when the bank account has been attached and hence the delay could be counted from the date of knowledge. If that is taken into account the appeal is within the limitation period of 120 days.