CGIT1 Delhi Order dated 08.09.2026 in EPF Appeal No. D-1/29/2025 M/s Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd vs APFC on 8 September 2026

1. The appellant had filed the present appeal challenging an order dated 28.03.2025 of the respondent vide which the respondent had directed the appellant to pay the outstanding dues of Rs.2,29,16,994/- only under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous provisions Act, 1952 (for short the "EPF Act〃). As required under section 7-0 of the EPF Act, this tribunal had directed the appellant to deposit forty percent of the assessed amount by way of FDR favouring Registrar CGIT for one year within six weeks vide order dated September 01, 2025.

2. Upon an application filed by the appellant seeking extension of time for complying with the directions of this Tribunal, vide order dated October 27, 2025, this Tribunal had granted a further extension till November 17, 2025 to the appellant for complying with the above-said orders dated September 01, 2025.

M/s Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, RO, Delhi East.

3. Upon a request by the appellant for further extension of time to comply with the aforesaid orders, vide order dated November 17, 2025, this tribunal has granted further time upto December 23, 2025 to the appellant to comply with the aforesaid order dated September 01, 2025.

4. Thereafter, upon a request by the appellant for further extension of time to comply with the aforesaid orders, vide order dated April 10, 2026, this tribunal had granted further time to the appellant upto September 08, 2026 to comply with the order dated September 01, 2025 of this tribunal.

5. Now, even the extended period of about five months granted to the appellant for complying with the orders of this Tribunal dated September 01, 2025 has expired. The clerk of this Tribunal has reported that the appellant has again failed to comply with the orders dated September 01, 2025 of this Tribunal.

6. The present appeal of the appellant cannot be entertained by this Tribunal unless the appellant has deposited seventy five percent of the assessed amount or any reduced amount permitted by the Tribunal, with the Tribunal as per mandate of section 7-0 of the EPF Act. Since the appellant has failed to deposit even the reduced amount as permitted by this Tribunal, the present appeal cannot be entertained as per Section 7-0 of the EPF Act.

M/s Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, RO, Delhi East.

7. Hence, the present appeal of the appellant is hereby dismissed for non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of Section 7-0 of the EPF Act.

8. Case file be consigned to the Record Room. (Ajay Kuma^ab) Presiding Officer Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Delhi-1 08.09.2026