Posted by & filed under High Court Judgements-PF.

Dear all,

As we are are aware that many employer are not getting covered  their employees under EPF act if the Basic Wages are more then 15000 or 6500
(before 1st Sep 2014) 

In the recent Appellant filed an appeal before the Employees’ Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, challenging the order passed by the EPF Authority under section 7A and 7Q of the Act on the ground that EPF Authority has not considered the fact that employees drawing salary more than Rs.6500/- per month are ‘excluded employees’ not covered under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

Only oral submission is not sustainable in respect of stand of the employer that its employees were drawing salary more than Rs.6500/- to bring them under the purview of ‘excluded employees’ not to be coverable under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 in the absence of any documentary evidence since it is mandatory obligation of the employer to maintain its records properly.

The EPF Appellate Tribunal observed that appellant joined the proceedings before the EPF Authority, several opportunities were given to him to submit proper records to prove the factum of wages of the employees to be more than Rs.6500/-  or Rs 15000 ( From 1st Sep-2014) per month, but the employer failed even to produce relevant records including appointment letters showing salary, date of appointment; Form 11 i.e. declaration regarding previous service/membership, salary slips etc. whereas it is mandatory for an employer to maintain proper record regarding every employee. No books of Accounts and Income Tax Returns were submitted. 

No documentary evidence was submitted to prove that employees were drawing salary more than Rs.6500/- per month. Rather, the appellant submitted an affidavit declaring non-maintenance of Books of Accounts and non-submission of Income Tax Returns etc. 

Only oral submission is not sustainable. It is on record that specific number of employees were found working in the appellant establishment upon physical verification of Enforcement Officer. Hence, appeal is dismissed since there is no illegality in the impugned order.

Associated Security & Intelligence Agency vs. APFC, Muzaffarpur 

ATA No. 151(3) 2013, decided on 29.7.2015

From the above order i would request all employer to pls get  proper documentation done  have once copy in the respective Personal file of Employee so that there is no liability in future 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.