6207/2016
Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short EPFAT) in
ATA No. 1212(8) of 2015, whereby learned EPFAT has allowed ... recovered it also. The order was challenged by the
Respondent before the EPFAT by filing an appeal. The appeal was allowed
vide order dated
assails the order dated 04.11.2016 of the
Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (EPFAT) in appeal in
ATA No.94(4)2011 vide which the appeal ... behalf of the APFC (N) it had been contended before the
EPFAT that the "Act" was meant to provide social and financial
security
Employees'
Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short "EPFAT").
Respondent No.1-company could not remit Employees
Provident Fund timely during ... preferred an appeal before the EPFAT. EPFAT decided appeal filed by
respondent No.1 on 18.3.2011 by reducing the levy of damages and interest
petition is directed against an interlocutory order passed by
the Presiding Officer, EPFAT dated 28.02.2017 (Annex P-7) staying the
recovery of the amount ... Section 7-I of the EPF&MP Act. They submit that
EPFAT vide interlocutory order dated 28.02.2017 has granted limited stay
regarding damages
sufficient explanation in legal language. As per Rule 7 of the EPFAT
(Procedure) Rules, 1997, the appeal can be filed within 60 days ... EPFAT has the power to further condone the delay of 60 days if sufficient
cause is shown. Accordingly the maximum delay which can be condoned
proceedings of the matter had been
directed to be listed before the EPFAT on 16.9.2015.
8. The appellant therein, i.e., the present petitioner, however ... terms of the impugned order dated 5.6.2015 of the EPFAT (New
Delhi) and as a consequence thereof, the appeal 524(8)2015 of the
appellant
provisions of the Act timely.
2. It was thus observed by the EPFAT that there was no
ground to interfere with the findings dated ... Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner which has been upheld
by the EPFAT vide the impugned order dated 28 th February,
2017 was erroneous. It is essential
petitioner assails the impugned
order dated 30.05.2016 of the Presiding Officer, EPFAT in ATA No.
882(9)2011 whereby the appeal was dismissed in view ... Vide a prior order dated 02.01.2012 of the EPFAT in the same
appeal ATA No. 882(9)2011, it had also been directed
validity
of order of Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (for short
'EPFAT') dated 17.08.2011 (Annexure P-4).
The respondents failed to deposit ... aggrieved by the order dated
03.09.2009 respondent preferred an appeal before the EPFAT. EPFAT
remanded the matter for recalculation of damages and interest @ 17%
inclusive
Commissioner, Amritsar preferred an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal
(for short 'EPFAT'). For want of Presiding Officer, petitioner's appeal was
pending ... good case on merits. Therefore, dismissing petitioner's appeal
by the EPFAT on technicality would result in financial loss to the
petitioner. Therefore
