VISHNU SECURITY SERVICES Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of the order passed on 11/10/2022, the present application has been rendered infructuous and is, accordingly, disposed of. W.P.(C) 7193/2011

(2.) The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeks to assail the order dtd. 4/7/2011 passed by the Employee Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal. Vide the impugned order, the Appellate Tribunal has rejected the petitioner 's appeal against the order dtd. 18/8/2006 passed under Sec. 7A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,90,417.00 towards the Provident Fund dues.

(3.) The primary submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order dtd. 4/7/2011 is an unreasoned order, having being passed without dealing with the submissions and documents filed by the petitioner. He submits that even though it is an admitted position that the petitioner had filed copies of its Income Tax Returns to demonstrate that it was not carrying out any business after 2002, the learned Tribunal erroneously recorded that no documents were produced by the petitioner. Even the order passed by the learned Assessing Officer on 18/8/2006 was wholly perverse as the said order presumes that the petitioner had not produced any documents whereas as a matter of fact, the sole proprietor of the petitioner had duly appeared in the proceedings before the learned Assessing Officer on 31/7/2006 and made a categoric statement that no business was being carried out by the petitioner after 2002. He submits that if the petitioner had been directed, the petitioner would have filed the relevant wage sheets and Income Tax Returns even before the learned Assessing Officer but no such direction having been issued, no adverse inference could have been drawn against the petitioner. He, therefore, prays that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the Appellate Tribunal for re-adjudication of the petitioner 's appeal on merits.