VARDHAMAN CONSTRUCTION Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER II

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Writ Petition, a proprietary concern engaged in the business of construction for Government contracts, has challenged order dated 15-12-2016, passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and the liability assessed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner against the petitioner under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 [for short, 'the said Act'], has been confirmed.

(2.) The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Akola, initiated an inquiry under Section 7-A of the said Act against the petitioner. A report dated 24-07-2012 was submitted by the Enforcement Officer before the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Akola, in respect of assessment of liability of the petitioner for the period November, 2004 to March, 2009.

(3.) On 22-05-2013, the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, passed order under Section 7-A of the said Act. The said authority recorded that a number of opportunities were granted to the petitioner establishment and finding that no record other than balance sheets were produced by the petitioner, the said authority concluded that on the available documents 25 % of total expenditure was to be taken as basis for levying liability payable by the petitioner establishment for the aforesaid period. The said amount came to Rs, 67,67,178/-. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed appeal before the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal. The said appeal was allowed by the Tribunal, only on the ground that the beneficiaries under the said Act were not identified while passing order under Section 7-A of the said Act. On this basis, the order of the Provident Fund Commissioner was set aside and a fresh enquiry was directed.