https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183074 A separate provident fund code could not be allotted to a unit that formed part of one integrated establishment already covered under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The Court read Section 2A to treat departments or branches of the same establishment, whether in the same or different places, as one establishment, and noted that the Scheme contemplated common disclosure and aggregation of branch-wise particulars and contributions. On that basis, the separate code allocation for the Tungidighi unit was unsustainable, and the consequential steps were set aside, while the authorities retained power to proceed with assessment and recovery of any outstanding statutory dues in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 17 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 May 2016 14:11:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183074 A separate provident fund code could not be allotted to a unit that formed part of one integrated establishment already covered under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The Court read Section 2A to treat departments or branches of the same establishment, whether in the same or different places, as one establishment, and noted that the Scheme contemplated common disclosure and aggregation of branch-wise particulars and contributions. On that basis, the separate code allocation for the Tungidighi unit was unsustainable, and the consequential steps were set aside, while the authorities retained power to proceed with assessment and recovery of any outstanding statutory dues in accordance with law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 17 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183074