EPF matters order dated 01.10.2025 CGIT-1 Delhi. on 1 October 2025

D-1/43/2025 M/s Innovision Limited vs. APFC/ RPFC Delhi West.

Present: Sh. Rajiv Shukla, ld. counsel for the Appellant.

None for the Respondent. Order Dated-01.10.2025

This is an appeal preferred by the appellant assailing the order dated 15.07.2025 passed u/s 14B and 7Q of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 by the respondent authority whereby an amount of Rs.1,96,04,802/- has been assessed as damages and Rs.1,33,97,337/- as interest for belated payment of PF dues.

Appellant has also moved an application for condonation of delay stating that delay in filing the appeal has been beyond the control of the appellant. He has received the impugned order on 22.07.2025. Thereafter, legal advice was sought and the Sh. Narender Kumar, AGM was appointed as A/R to take further steps for challenging the appeal. However, the A/R had to travel out of station for business purposes till 18.09.2025, thereafter, the A/R engaged the counsel on 20.09.2025 and handed over the impugned order dated 15.07.2025 to the counsel. Therefore, the appeal is filed belatedly before this tribunal.

Office has placed a notice sent through email to the appellant as well as office of the respondent informing them about today’s hearing, however, none has appeared on behalf of the respondent. Considering the fact that the appeal has been filed belatedly but is in the extended period of limitation which this tribunal is empowered to condone if sufficient cause are explained by the appellant. Therefore, the application for condonation of delay is allowed.

Counsel for the appellant further seeks stay of the impugned order. Since the respondent is not present, the matter is listed for filing of reply to the main appeal and specifically to the para 8 where appellant has prayed for interim orders. Respondent is also directed to bring trial court record by the next date of hearing i.e. 04.11.2025. Till then, respondent is restrained from taking any coercive action in regard to the impugned order.

774(4)2013 Divas Laboratories Ltd. vs. APFC/RPFC, Delhi.

Present: None for the Appellant.

Ms. Santwana Aggarwal, Ld. Counsel for the

Respondent. Order Dated-01.10.2025

Since the respondent has raised the question about the limitation issue, the matter has been reopened. Though, much water has flown since then and the matter has been listed for final arguments after the compliance u/s 7O of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 has been made by the appellant. Since the appellant has sought adjournment, let the matter be fixed for 10.10.2025.

30(4)2014 Okara Roadways vs. APFC/RPFC, Delhi.

Present: Sh. Vishal Proxy for the Appellant.

None for the Respondent. Order Dated-01.10.2025

Office has placed on record an email sent by Sh. S.P. Arora, Ld. Counsel for the appellant where he has attached copy of the order dated 27.08.2025 passed by Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju of Delhi High Court in W.P. (C) 8572/2022. It is informed by the office that the appellant had filed an appeal bearing no. 621(4)2013 challenging an order passed by the respondent u/s 7A of the EPF & MP Act, 1952. This tribunal had allowed the appeal and now the respondent has preferred a writ petition against the order passed by this tribunal. The Delhi High Court after hearing the matter on 27.08.2025 has adjourned the hearing for 27.01.2026.

Office is directed to link the appeal file bearing no 621(4)2013 with this appeal so that proper adjudication can be done. The proxy counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant requested for listing of this case after the hearing before Delhi High Court in the writ petition. Put up on 11.02.2026.

200(4)2016 Chelsea Mills vs. APFC/RPFC, Delhi.

Present: None for the Appellant.

None for the Respondent. Order Dated-01.10.2025

Respondent has sent request through email about his unavailability for today.

It is a matter of fact that this matter has been adjourned en-bloc since 23.11.2022 however, on 19.05.2025 attendance of one Sh. Ajit Upadhyay was marked. However, today, none of the counsels are present for either of the parties. Let one more opportunity be given to the parties to argue the matter. Put up for 14.10.2025. Let notice be issued to the parties through email.

649(4)2016 Tristar Global Infrasture Pvt. Ltd. vs. APFC.

Present: None for the Appellant.

Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent. Order Dated-01.10.2025

Respondent has placed on record an order passed by the NCLT dated 28.08.2024 showing that the affairs of the appellant establishment have been completely wound up and its assets have been completely liquidated. Payments have been made to various parties.

The entire order passed by NCLT does not reflect anything paid to the respondent. On being enquired, respondent counsel submitted that he had belatedly filed the claim before the liquidator which was dismissed in the year 2022. Subsequently, he had moved an application before the NCLT against the rejection of the claim which was also dismissed by the NCLT.

Record further reveals that Rajiv Shukla had sought discharge from the present appeal and his prayer was allowed vide order dated 24.07.2023. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned enblock and today in pursuance of the notice received, counsel for the respondent has appeared and placed on record the above said order.

In view of the fact that the company had been wound up and nobody has appeared in respect of the notice issued by this tribunal on behalf of the appellant, appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution.

D-1/25/2022 M/s Sarvesh Security Services Pvt. Ltd.vs. APFC.

Present: Sh. Surender Singh Proxy for the Appellant.

Sh. Rajesh Kumar, ld. counsel & Deepak, A/R for the Respondent. Order Dated-01.10.2025

Appellant has filed authority letter as well as written submissions. Ld.counsel for the respondent has submitted that he has returned the file, however, department has still not engaged any counsel. Let department is directed to engage new counsel as early as possible. Let the matter be fixed for final argument on 30.10.2025.

D-1/34/2022 M/s PCR Buildtech Private Limited vs. APFC/ RPFC Delhi.

Present: Sh. Sauhardya Biswas, proxy for the Appellant.

Sh. Narender Kumar, ld. counsel & Sh. Deepak Kumar, A/R for the Respondent. Order Dated-01.10.2025

Proxy counsel for appellant has requested adjournment. In these circumstances, let the matter be listed for 07.11.2025.