Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

22.The dealing hands, namely, L.W.1 and L.W.4 state about the wrong credits made by M/s.CPF India Pvt. Ltd., thereafter letter issued by EPFO to the establishment, M/s.CPF India Pvt. Ltd. seeking time for submission of documents and the processing of the file in Group 21. L.W.2 states about https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.Nos.992, 1032 & 1040 of 2021 and 196 & 396 of 2022 adopting of online remittance from 01.04.2012. L.W.2/Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner as well as L.W.6/Accounts Officer categorically state that the dealing hand is the custodian of note files and correspondences. In this case, one of the allegation against A3 and A4 is that they got access to the note files and letter dated 15.12.2015 and handed over the same to A1 who in turn handed over to A2. The dealing hands, namely, L.W.1, L.W.4 and other witnesses of EPFO stated that files in the office would be kept in the rack and after office hours, they would not have any control over the same. The Accounts Officer/L.W.3 states that the ledger account of particular establishment can be viewed by any person in the office who has an User ID. Though these are privy to EPFO, in case of need for the establishment on their request the member ledger can be furnished by getting orders from the competent official. Hence, the availability of the letter and the ledger account is not of serious consequence. L.W.13/K.Sekar, Data Processing Assistant in EDP Section of EPFO confirms that printout taken from the printer assigned to him and also gives a justification that in case if any printer does not function properly, the concerned come to the EDP Section to take printout. The Accounts Officer/L.W.3, L.W.5/Section Supervisor, another Accounts Officer/L.W.6, the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners/L.W.2, L.W.8, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.Nos.992, 1032 & 1040 of 2021 and 196 & 396 of 2022 L.W.9, L.W.10, L.W.11 and L.W.12 have stated to the effect that files passed through various levels, properly scrutinized with notings, reached APFC and finally RPFC passed the reconciliation order, thereafter payments were remitted and accounts have now been straightened. In this case, strangely Shri Pankajraman and Shri.Durga Prasad, Regional Provident Fund Commissioners who dealt with the file, approved the reconciliation order not been cited as witness but the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners and other witnesses of EPFO confirmed that the short fall of Rs.1,59,66,359 in Account No.10 is due to excess remittance of Rs.1,51,51,755/- in Account No.1 have now been reconciled and set right. The difference amount now paid which is not disputed.