Employees Provident Fund - The Legal Chamber

The Supreme Court remanded the matter to the High Court to determine the priority of charges between the EPFO, under Section 11(2) of the Employees' Provident Fund Act, 1952, and secured creditors, including Axis Bank, under Section 35 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The core legal issue for fresh adjudication is the conflict between the statutory first charge of EPFO dues and the primacy claimed by secured creditors. Facts Of The Case: M/s Acropetal Technologies Pvt. Ltd. defaulted on its Employees' Provident Fund (EPF) dues from July 2013. The EPFO determined a liability and, upon learning the company's properties were to be auctioned by various banks, invoked its priority under the EPF Act. The EPFO specifically asserted a first charge over the 'Attibele property' being auctioned by Axis B...

The Supreme Court upheld the clubbing of two pharmaceutical companies under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, emphasizing the principles of unity of ownership, management, functional integrality, and financial unity. The Court rejected the argument that separate juristic entities preclude clubbing, affirming that the EPF Act, as a beneficial legislation, must be interpreted to prevent evasion. The decision reiterated that multiple factors, including common premises, shared infrastructure, and unified management, cumulatively determine whether entities constitute a single establishment. The judgment reinforced the authorities' discretion to assess dues retrospectively once clubbing is established. Facts Of The Case: The case involved M/s Torino Laborat...

Tag: Employees Provident Fund

Who Gets Paid First? Supreme Court Reopens Case on Priority Between Employee Provident Fund and Secured Lenders

Landmark Ruling: Supreme Court Says Two Companies Are One for EPF Compliance