BALU FIRE CLAY MINES Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) THIS writ has been filed for quashing Annexure 3 passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952 (hereinafter the Act), whereby and where under the review petition of the partitioned to review the order as contained in Annexure 1 has been rejected. Annexure 1 has also been sought to be quashed on the ground that this has been passed on erroneous appreciation of the documents of the petitioner particularly the Exhibits E/5 and E/6.

(3.) THE main ground taken by the petitioner for review was that the petitioner was a mining Engineer and a consultant and in that capacity he earned and consequently filed income tax returns. Thoseincome tax returns were also exhibited before the authority concerned who was exercising his power under the Act for purpose of assessment but those documents i.e. Exts. E/5 and E/6 were wrongly construed by the authority concerned as the authority concerned construed those documents to' be income tax returns filed in respect of the establishment concerned and, thus, according to the petitioner that authority committed an error apparent on the face of record by considering these documents in respect of the establishment and not as the document of income tax returns of the petitioner in his individual capacity and, therefore, the assessment was wrongly done. The further case of the petitioner is that though the review petition was filed on this ground but this matter was not discussed in review and the same was rejected by a summary order without answering the objection raised by the petitioner.