ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, CHANDIGARH Vs. EMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral) - In the instant writ petition, the petitioner-Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner has questioned the validity of the order dated 20.9.2012 passed by the Employees Provident Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.

(2.) The second respondent - M/s Harry Hyper Store were allotted PF Code on 28.8.2009 based on the application made by the second respondent while enclosing list of employees vide Annexure P-4 wherein 15 plus 10 employees have been shown.

(3.) Learned counsel for the second respondent submitted that a sum of Rs. 45,804/- was deposited for 15 employees. The EPF Department inspected the premises of the second respondent and found that there were 25 employees. Consequently, Section 7-A proceedings were drawn by giving ample opportunity to the second respondent and determined the arrears of provident fund to be deposited by the second respondent to the tune of Rs. 3,98,446/- as on 31.1.2011 vide Annexure P-1. The second respondent feeling aggrieved by the 7-A proceedings dated 7.2.2011 preferred an appeal before the Employees Provident Appellate Tribunal. On 20.9.2012, the Employees Provident Appellate Tribunal allowed the second respondent's appeal based on the affidavits of the employees of the second respondent.