SWEEPTECH Vs. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties. Mr.Suresh Kumar waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent.

(2.) In this Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner assails the order dated 19/12/2016 passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner challenged the order dated 17/07/2014 passed by the Assistant PF Commissioner Penal Damages RO Mumbai I. The petitioner is a covered establishment under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'Act'). For the purpose of levying damages under the provisions of the Act, summons dated 06/06/2014 was issued to the petitioner for giving them a reasonable opportunity of representing their case. The petitioner is aggrieved by that part of the order dated 17/07/2014 whereby the authority concerned has directed the petitioner to remit the amount of Rs.8,79,986/- being damages payable under various heads of accounts as per section 14B of the Act.

(3.) It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the summons received, they had appeared before the authority on 26/06/2014 for inquiry in connection with imposing the penal damages. By a detailed reply dated 17/07/2014 at page 41, the petitioner pointed out the difficulty they faced for not remitting the contribution in time which was not willful. A specific reference can be had to paragraphs 2 and 4 which read thus: