Back
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY
U. P. National Manufactures Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal/CGIT – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. determination of damages under act, 1952 (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner's argument for reduction of damages (Para 4) |
| 3. respondents' position on damages and benefits to employees (Para 5) |
| 4. court's reduction of damages based on circumstances (Para 6) |
| 5. final order disposing the writ petition (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.
Heard Sri Devesh Tripathi, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate for Respondents.
2. Petitioner, an organization, is aggrieved from quantum of damages determined by Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner by means of impugned order passed under Section 14B of Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1952").
3. Damages determined under Section 14B of Act, 1952 is Rs. 1,77,719/- and under Section 7Q is Rs. 73,028/-, total being Rs. 2,50,747/-. In pursuance of interim order passed by this Court half of amount has already been deposited by petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that respondents have approached appropriate authority after a huge delay of 8-9 years which was not considered by authority as well as considering the financial condition o
Damages for delayed payment under the EPF Act cannot exceed the amount of arrears, and interest cannot be levied on penal amounts without statutory authority.
The court affirmed that under Section 14-B of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, only 50% of damages are recoverable, as established by prior judicial decisions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Sections 14-B and 7-Q of the Act of 1952 and the grant of a stay on the recovery of damages and interest based on compliance ....
For the imposition of damages under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the establishment of mens rea is not a mandatory requirement. Once a delay in r....
Interest under Section 7Q of the Act is independent of damages under Section 14B, and claims regarding interest must be pursued in the pending appeal.
Compliance with the deposit requirements under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 is essential to proceed with an appeal.
No appeal against Section 7Q interest under EPF Act; damages recovery stayed pending Tribunal appeal; instalments permitted for interest payment.
Damages under Section 14B leviable for delayed PF remittance without need for mens rea; Tribunal's discretion upheld.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
