The Calcutta High Court has ruled that the power of the provident fund commissioner to impose penalty on employers who delay their contribution is limited by certain considerations. Sections 14A and 32A of the Provident Fund Act grant the authorities the power to recover penalty not exceeding the amount of arrears and specify the rate of penalty. But the authorities have the discretion to reduce it. The argument of the authorities that they cannot reduce the penalty was rejected by the high court in the case, Topcon International Ltd vs RPF Commissioner. The authorities can take into consideration factors like frequency of the delays, the number of days delayed, power cuts, non-realisation of debts by the employer, the delay on the part of the authorities to claim damages and whether the company has been declared sick. The court clarified that though the authorities could reduce the amount of penalty or damages, that discretion could not be used to waive it altogether. Before levying and recovering such damages, the employer shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/family-accord-prevails-over-law-suits-115120600838_1.html
Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/family-accord-prevails-over-law-suits-115120600838_1.html
Comments
Post a Comment