DEEPAK NITRITE LIMITED Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K.M. Patel, learned senior counsel with Mr. V.K. Patel, learned advocate for the petitioner company and Ms. Shailaja, learned advocate for the respondent P.F. Department.

(2.) In present case, the petitioner has placed under challenge order dated 6.12010 passed by the learned Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal and the order dated 4.4.1996 passed by respondent No. 1 RPFC in exercise of powers under section 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

(3.) By his order dated 4.4.1996, the respondent No. 1 held that the amounts paid in name and style of 'production incentive' would fall within the purview of the term 'basic wages' as defined and contemplated under the Act and consequently, the said payments liable to be taken into account for calculating contribution payable towards provident fund and other funds under the Act.