Part 2 - EPF administration, records and claims

Paragraph index | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour › EPFO Schemes › Paragraphs Paragraph index Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026: all paragraphs Searchable paragraph list; each page owns one current legal topic. 60 paragraphs No duplicate canonicals Paragraph 1 Short title, commencement and application Paragraph 2 Definitions Paragraph 3 Central Provident Fund Commissioner and Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer Paragraph 4 Regional and local offices Paragraph 5 Appointment of officers and employees of Central Board Paragraph 6 Information to Central Board regarding appointments Paragraph 7 Administrative and financial powers of Commissioner Paragraph 8 Staff Provident Fund and other benefits Paragraph 9 Membership of the fund Paragraph 10 Retention of membership Paragraph 11 Resolution of questions about membership Paragraph 12 Exemption of employee or class of employees Paragraph 13 Terms and conditions after exemption Paragraph 14 Composition of board of trustees Paragraph 15 Extension of exemption Paragraph 16 Cessation and surrender of exemption Paragraph 17 Transfer of accumulation from existing provident fund Paragraph 18 Contributions Paragraph 19 Additional voluntary contributions Paragraph 20 Responsibility for payment of contribution Paragraph 21 Employer’s share not to be deducted from members Paragraph 22 Recovery of member’s share of contributions Paragraph 23 Levy and recovery of damages for default Paragraph 24 Duties of employers Paragraph 25 Duties of employee Paragraph 26 Employer to furnish particulars of ownership and authorised signatories Paragraph 27 Duties of principal employer and contractor Paragraph 28 Payment of contributions etc. Paragraph 29 Fixation of administrative charges or other fee Paragraph 30 Annual statement of member’s account and e-Pass Book Paragraph 31 Current Account Paragraph 32 Administration Account Paragraph 33 Provident Fund Account Paragraph 34 Interest Account Paragraph 35 Investment of moneys belonging to Employees’ Provident Fund Paragraph 36 Disposal of the fund Paragraph 37 Expenses of administration Paragraph 38 Form and manner of maintenance of accounts Paragraph 39 Audit Paragraph 40 Budget Paragraph 41 Accounts of members Paragraph 42 Interest Paragraph 43 Transfer of membership Paragraph 44 Nomination Paragraph 45 Financing of existing members’ Life Insurance Policy Paragraph 46 Partial withdrawals from Fund Paragraph 47 Computation of period of membership Paragraph 48 Payment of partial withdrawal Paragraph 49 Circumstances in which accumulations in Fund are payable to member Paragraph 50 Accumulations of deceased member to whom payable Paragraph 51 Payment of accumulations of funds of International Workers Paragraph 52 Payment to person charged with offence of murder Paragraph 53 Payment of Provident Fund Paragraph 54 Filing of claims Paragraph 55 Inoperative Account Paragraph 56 Annual report of Board Paragraph 57 Conduct of business of Central Board Paragraph 58 Misuse of benefits Paragraph 59 Writing off losses Paragraph 60 Special provisions

Paragraph 1: Short title, commencement and application | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 1 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 1 Paragraph 1: Short title, commencement and application Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter I — Preliminary G.S.R. 525(E) Scope and commencement Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter I — Preliminary Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 1 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Short title, commencement and application . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Names the scheme and anchors commencement to Gazette publication Names the scheme and anchors commencement to Gazette publication. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Applies subject to Code sections 20, 21 and 143 Applies subject to Code sections 20, 21 and 143. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Covers establishments to which Chapter III applies and specified government-controlled establishments whose employees lack equivalent contributory protection Covers establishments to which Chapter III applies and specified government-controlled establishments whose employees lack equivalent contributory protection. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties EPFO / authorised officer Employer or member, according to the transaction Code linkage Sections 15, 20, 21 and 143. Timing and trigger Effective from Gazette publication; coverage testing is event-driven when establishment or employee status changes. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail coverage memorandum establishment registration employee population and threshold analysis Gazette and commencement record Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Short title, commencement and application . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 2 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision Paragraph 2 →

Paragraph 2: Definitions | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 2 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 2 Paragraph 2: Definitions Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter I — Preliminary G.S.R. 525(E) Defined terms Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter I — Preliminary Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 2 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Definitions . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Defines authorised signatory, board of trustees, excluded employee, exempted establishment, international worker, member, principal employer, trustee and UAN Defines authorised signatory, board of trustees, excluded employee, exempted establishment, international worker, member, principal employer, trustee and UAN. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Excluded-employee status is tested when the employee would otherwise enter membership; later wage growth does not by itself erase existing membership Excluded-employee status is tested when the employee would otherwise enter membership; later wage growth does not by itself erase existing membership. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: International-worker analysis requires nationality, passport, social-security agreement and detached-worker evidence International-worker analysis requires nationality, passport, social-security agreement and detached-worker evidence. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Principal-employer control extends to contract labour and ultimate-control situations Principal-employer control extends to contract labour and ultimate-control situations. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties EPFO / authorised officer Employer or member, according to the transaction Code linkage Sections 2, 14, 15, 20, 21 and 143. Timing and trigger Definitions apply throughout; classification should be documented at onboarding and whenever status changes. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail classification memorandum employee master contracts and organisation chart nationality/SSA documents where relevant Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Definitions . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 1 Related provision Paragraph 3 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 1 Paragraph 3 →

Paragraph 3: Central Provident Fund Commissioner and Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 3 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 3 Paragraph 3: Central Provident Fund Commissioner and Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board G.S.R. 525(E) Fund and accounting Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 3 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Central Provident Fund Commissioner and Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Central Provident Fund Commissioner and Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Central Provident Fund Commissioner and Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail general ledger member sub-ledger bank and investment reconciliation valuation/audit report board approval Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Central Provident Fund Commissioner and Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 2 Related provision Paragraph 4 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 2 Paragraph 4 →

Paragraph 4: Regional and local offices | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 4 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 4 Paragraph 4: Regional and local offices Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board G.S.R. 525(E) Administration and control Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 4 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Regional and local offices . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Regional and local offices”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Regional and local offices”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties EPFO / authorised officer Employer or member, according to the transaction Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail authority order input record decision note approval audit trail Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Regional and local offices . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 3 Related provision Paragraph 5 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 3 Paragraph 5 →

Paragraph 5: Appointment of officers and employees of Central Board | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 5 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 5 Paragraph 5: Appointment of officers and employees of Central Board Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board G.S.R. 525(E) Administration and control Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 5 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Appointment of officers and employees of Central Board . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Appointment of officers and employees of Central Board”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Appointment of officers and employees of Central Board”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Member / employee / claimant Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail authority order input record decision note approval audit trail Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Appointment of officers and employees of Central Board . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 4 Related provision Paragraph 6 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 4 Paragraph 6 →

Paragraph 6: Information to Central Board regarding appointments | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 6 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 6 Paragraph 6: Information to Central Board regarding appointments Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board G.S.R. 525(E) Administration and control Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 6 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Information to Central Board regarding appointments . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Information to Central Board regarding appointments”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Information to Central Board regarding appointments”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail authority order input record decision note approval audit trail Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Information to Central Board regarding appointments . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 5 Related provision Paragraph 7 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 5 Paragraph 7 →

Paragraph 7: Administrative and financial powers of Commissioner | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 7 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 7 Paragraph 7: Administrative and financial powers of Commissioner Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board G.S.R. 525(E) Administration and control Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 7 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Administrative and financial powers of Commissioner . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Administrative and financial powers of Commissioner”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Administrative and financial powers of Commissioner”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail authority order input record decision note approval audit trail Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Administrative and financial powers of Commissioner . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 6 Related provision Paragraph 8 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 6 Paragraph 8 →

Paragraph 8: Staff Provident Fund and other benefits | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 8 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 8 Paragraph 8: Staff Provident Fund and other benefits Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board G.S.R. 525(E) Fund and accounting Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter II — Officers of the Central Board Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 8 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Staff Provident Fund and other benefits . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Staff Provident Fund and other benefits”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Staff Provident Fund and other benefits”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Member / employee / claimant Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail general ledger member sub-ledger bank and investment reconciliation valuation/audit report board approval Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Staff Provident Fund and other benefits . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 7 Related provision Paragraph 9 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 7 Paragraph 9 →

Paragraph 9: Membership of the fund | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 9 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 9 Paragraph 9: Membership of the fund Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter III — Membership G.S.R. 525(E) Membership and service Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter III — Membership Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 9 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Membership of the fund . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Carries forward persons who were members or required to be members under the superseded scheme Carries forward persons who were members or required to be members under the superseded scheme. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Requires eligible employees to join from the later of scheme application or employment Requires eligible employees to join from the later of scheme application or employment. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Permits joint employer-employee request for membership or contribution above the statutory wage ceiling, subject to administrative charges and full compliance Permits joint employer-employee request for membership or contribution above the statutory wage ceiling, subject to administrative charges and full compliance. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Contains special rules for international workers and social-security-agreement cases Contains special rules for international workers and social-security-agreement cases. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Member / employee / claimant Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 17, 20 and 21. Timing and trigger Membership attaches from the statutory trigger; delayed enrolment does not postpone contribution liability. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail UAN/member ID date of joining and exit monthly contribution ledger transfer and service history Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Membership of the fund . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 8 Related provision Paragraph 10 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 8 Paragraph 10 →

Paragraph 10: Retention of membership | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 10 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 10 Paragraph 10: Retention of membership Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter III — Membership G.S.R. 525(E) Membership and service Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter III — Membership Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 10 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Retention of membership . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Identify entry date, carried-forward membership and excluded status Identify entry date, carried-forward membership and excluded status. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Reconcile service with monthly contribution history and transfer records Reconcile service with monthly contribution history and transfer records. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Resolve gaps before benefit or withdrawal processing Resolve gaps before benefit or withdrawal processing. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Retention of membership”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Retention of membership”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Member / employee / claimant Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail UAN/member ID date of joining and exit monthly contribution ledger transfer and service history Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Retention of membership . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 9 Related provision Paragraph 11 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 9 Paragraph 11 →

Paragraph 11: Resolution of questions about membership | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 11 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 11 Paragraph 11: Resolution of questions about membership Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter III — Membership G.S.R. 525(E) Membership and service Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter III — Membership Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 11 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Resolution of questions about membership . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Identify entry date, carried-forward membership and excluded status Identify entry date, carried-forward membership and excluded status. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Reconcile service with monthly contribution history and transfer records Reconcile service with monthly contribution history and transfer records. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Resolve gaps before benefit or withdrawal processing Resolve gaps before benefit or withdrawal processing. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Resolution of questions about membership”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Resolution of questions about membership”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Member / employee / claimant Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail UAN/member ID date of joining and exit monthly contribution ledger transfer and service history Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Resolution of questions about membership . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 10 Related provision Paragraph 12 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 10 Paragraph 12 →

Paragraph 12: Exemption of employee or class of employees | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 12 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 12 Paragraph 12: Exemption of employee or class of employees Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter IV — Exemption and transition G.S.R. 525(E) Exemption and trust governance Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter IV — Exemption and transition Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 12 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Exemption of employee or class of employees . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Exemption of employee or class of employees”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Exemption of employee or class of employees”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Member / employee / claimant Appropriate Government Board of trustees / exempted establishment Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail exemption order trust deed/policy board minutes investment and return records inspection reports Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Exemption of employee or class of employees . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 11 Related provision Paragraph 13 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 11 Paragraph 13 →

Paragraph 13: Terms and conditions after exemption | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 13 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 13 Paragraph 13: Terms and conditions after exemption Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter IV — Exemption and transition G.S.R. 525(E) Exemption and trust governance Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter IV — Exemption and transition Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 13 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Terms and conditions after exemption . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Terms and conditions after exemption”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Terms and conditions after exemption”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Appropriate Government Board of trustees / exempted establishment Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail exemption order trust deed/policy board minutes investment and return records inspection reports Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Terms and conditions after exemption . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 12 Related provision Paragraph 14 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 12 Paragraph 14 →

Paragraph 14: Composition of board of trustees | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 14 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 14 Paragraph 14: Composition of board of trustees Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter IV — Exemption and transition G.S.R. 525(E) Exemption and trust governance Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter IV — Exemption and transition Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 14 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Composition of board of trustees . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Composition of board of trustees”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Composition of board of trustees”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Appropriate Government Board of trustees / exempted establishment Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail exemption order trust deed/policy board minutes investment and return records inspection reports Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Composition of board of trustees . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 13 Related provision Paragraph 15 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 13 Paragraph 15 →

Paragraph 15: Extension of exemption | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 15 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 15 Paragraph 15: Extension of exemption Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter IV — Exemption and transition G.S.R. 525(E) Exemption and trust governance Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter IV — Exemption and transition Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 15 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Extension of exemption . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Extension of exemption”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Extension of exemption”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Appropriate Government Board of trustees / exempted establishment Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail exemption order trust deed/policy board minutes investment and return records inspection reports Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Extension of exemption . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 14 Related provision Paragraph 16 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 14 Paragraph 16 →

Paragraph 16: Cessation and surrender of exemption | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 16 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 16 Paragraph 16: Cessation and surrender of exemption Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter IV — Exemption and transition G.S.R. 525(E) Exemption and trust governance Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter IV — Exemption and transition Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 16 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Cessation and surrender of exemption . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable Confirm statutory power and whether benefits are at least as favourable. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records Maintain approval, trust deed/policy, investment, returns and inspection records. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk Track conditions, renewal and cancellation risk. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Cessation and surrender of exemption”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Cessation and surrender of exemption”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Appropriate Government Board of trustees / exempted establishment Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail exemption order trust deed/policy board minutes investment and return records inspection reports Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Cessation and surrender of exemption . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 15 Related provision Paragraph 17 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 15 Paragraph 17 →

Paragraph 17: Transfer of accumulation from existing provident fund | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 17 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 17 Paragraph 17: Transfer of accumulation from existing provident fund Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter IV — Exemption and transition G.S.R. 525(E) Fund and accounting Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter IV — Exemption and transition Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 17 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Transfer of accumulation from existing provident fund . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Transfer of accumulation from existing provident fund”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Transfer of accumulation from existing provident fund”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail general ledger member sub-ledger bank and investment reconciliation valuation/audit report board approval Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Transfer of accumulation from existing provident fund . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 16 Related provision Paragraph 18 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 16 Paragraph 18 →

Paragraph 18: Contributions | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 18 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 18 Paragraph 18: Contributions Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter V — Contributions and charges G.S.R. 525(E) Contributions and default Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter V — Contributions and charges Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 18 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Contributions . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Separates employee and employer statutory contributions and requires calculation on Code-defined wages subject to the notified ceiling Separates employee and employer statutory contributions and requires calculation on Code-defined wages subject to the notified ceiling. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Preserves the general 12% contribution architecture, with 10% only for classes notified by the Central Government Preserves the general 12% contribution architecture, with 10% only for classes notified by the Central Government. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Requires payroll to distinguish statutory contribution, voluntary contribution and pension diversion Requires payroll to distinguish statutory contribution, voluntary contribution and pension diversion. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Rounding and wage-component treatment must follow the Scheme and Code definition of wages Rounding and wage-component treatment must follow the Scheme and Code definition of wages. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Code linkage Sections 16 and 17. Timing and trigger Calculate for each wage month and reconcile with the monthly electronic return. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail wage register contribution computation electronic return/challan bank proof interest and damages working Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Contributions . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 17 Related provision Paragraph 19 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 17 Paragraph 19 →

Paragraph 19: Additional voluntary contributions | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 19 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 19 Paragraph 19: Additional voluntary contributions Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter V — Contributions and charges G.S.R. 525(E) Contributions and default Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter V — Contributions and charges Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 19 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Additional voluntary contributions . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Allows a member to contribute beyond the compulsory share by written or electronic election Allows a member to contribute beyond the compulsory share by written or electronic election. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: The employer is not automatically required to match the member’s additional voluntary amount The employer is not automatically required to match the member’s additional voluntary amount. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Payroll must retain election, effective month, change or withdrawal instruction and contribution reconciliation Payroll must retain election, effective month, change or withdrawal instruction and contribution reconciliation. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Code linkage Sections 16 and 17. Timing and trigger Apply from the accepted election period; do not backdate without a legally supported correction. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail wage register contribution computation electronic return/challan bank proof interest and damages working Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Additional voluntary contributions . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 18 Related provision Paragraph 20 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 18 Paragraph 20 →

Paragraph 20: Responsibility for payment of contribution | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 20 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 20 Paragraph 20: Responsibility for payment of contribution Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter V — Contributions and charges G.S.R. 525(E) Contributions and default Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter V — Contributions and charges Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 20 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Responsibility for payment of contribution . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Places primary responsibility on the employer for direct employees and employees engaged through contractors Places primary responsibility on the employer for direct employees and employees engaged through contractors. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Requires principal-employer control over contractor wage and contribution data Requires principal-employer control over contractor wage and contribution data. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Contribution liability is not displaced by a commercial indemnity in the service contract Contribution liability is not displaced by a commercial indemnity in the service contract. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Monthly reconciliation should match employee master, wage register, contractor bill and electronic return Monthly reconciliation should match employee master, wage register, contractor bill and electronic return. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Code linkage Sections 17, 123, 125 and 129. Timing and trigger Monthly, before statutory remittance and contractor-payment release. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail wage register contribution computation electronic return/challan bank proof interest and damages working Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Responsibility for payment of contribution . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 19 Related provision Paragraph 21 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 19 Paragraph 21 →

Paragraph 21: Employer’s share not to be deducted from members | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 21 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 21 Paragraph 21: Employer’s share not to be deducted from members Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter V — Contributions and charges G.S.R. 525(E) Administration and control Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter V — Contributions and charges Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 21 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Employer’s share not to be deducted from members . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level Identify the statutory actor, decision and approval level. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail Document inputs, evidence, outcome and review trail. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions Link the control to the Code, Scheme and current EPFO directions. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Employer’s share not to be deducted from members”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Employer’s share not to be deducted from members”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Member / employee / claimant Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail authority order input record decision note approval audit trail Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Employer’s share not to be deducted from members . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 20 Related provision Paragraph 22 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 20 Paragraph 22 →

Paragraph 22: Recovery of member’s share of contributions | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 22 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 22 Paragraph 22: Recovery of member’s share of contributions Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter V — Contributions and charges G.S.R. 525(E) Contributions and default Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter V — Contributions and charges Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 22 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Recovery of member’s share of contributions . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Fix the correct wage base, rate, ceiling and responsible employer Fix the correct wage base, rate, ceiling and responsible employer. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Reconcile payroll, contractor data, return, challan and bank debit Reconcile payroll, contractor data, return, challan and bank debit. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Calculate interest, damages and correction exposure separately Calculate interest, damages and correction exposure separately. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Recovery of member’s share of contributions”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Recovery of member’s share of contributions”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Member / employee / claimant Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail wage register contribution computation electronic return/challan bank proof interest and damages working Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Recovery of member’s share of contributions . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 21 Related provision Paragraph 23 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 21 Paragraph 23 →

Paragraph 23: Levy and recovery of damages for default | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 23 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 23 Paragraph 23: Levy and recovery of damages for default Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter V — Contributions and charges G.S.R. 525(E) Contributions and default Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter V — Contributions and charges Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 23 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Levy and recovery of damages for default . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Permits damages where contribution or other Scheme dues are paid late Permits damages where contribution or other Scheme dues are paid late. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: The Scheme grades damages by length of default: below two months, 0 The Scheme grades damages by length of default: below two months, 0.25% per month; more than two but below four months, 0.50% per month; beyond four months, 1% per month, subject to the operative text and adjudication. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Damages are distinct from statutory interest under Code section 127 Damages are distinct from statutory interest under Code section 127. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: An establishment should retain delay computation, reasons, payment proof and representations An establishment should retain delay computation, reasons, payment proof and representations. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties EPFO / authorised officer Employer or member, according to the transaction Code linkage Sections 127, 128 and 133. Timing and trigger Exposure begins with default and continues until payment; assess separately from interest. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail wage register contribution computation electronic return/challan bank proof interest and damages working Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Levy and recovery of damages for default . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 22 Related provision Paragraph 24 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 22 Paragraph 24 →

Paragraph 24: Duties of employers | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 24 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 24 Paragraph 24: Duties of employers Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns G.S.R. 525(E) Returns and records Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 24 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Duties of employers . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Requires employer registration and member particulars, UAN/KYC discipline, electronic returns and event reporting Requires employer registration and member particulars, UAN/KYC discipline, electronic returns and event reporting. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Covers entrants, exits, wages, contributions, ownership changes and exempted-establishment information Covers entrants, exits, wages, contributions, ownership changes and exempted-establishment information. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Employer remains responsible for accuracy even where payroll or compliance work is outsourced Employer remains responsible for accuracy even where payroll or compliance work is outsourced. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Correction controls should preserve original data, reason, approver and portal acknowledgement Correction controls should preserve original data, reason, approver and portal acknowledgement. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Code linkage Sections 123, 125 and 133. Timing and trigger Initial, monthly and event-based returns as specified; maintain an internal filing calendar. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail prescribed form or electronic return maker-checker evidence portal acknowledgement correction log retention register Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Duties of employers . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 23 Related provision Paragraph 25 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 23 Paragraph 25 →

Paragraph 25: Duties of employee | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 25 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 25 Paragraph 25: Duties of employee Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns G.S.R. 525(E) Returns and records Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 25 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Duties of employee . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Identify the event, filing owner, data source, form and portal Identify the event, filing owner, data source, form and portal. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Use maker-checker validation and preserve acknowledgement Use maker-checker validation and preserve acknowledgement. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Maintain records in inspection-ready form and retain correction history Maintain records in inspection-ready form and retain correction history. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Duties of employee”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Duties of employee”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Member / employee / claimant Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail prescribed form or electronic return maker-checker evidence portal acknowledgement correction log retention register Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Duties of employee . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 24 Related provision Paragraph 26 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 24 Paragraph 26 →

Paragraph 26: Employer to furnish particulars of ownership and authorised signatories | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 26 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 26 Paragraph 26: Employer to furnish particulars of ownership and authorised signatories Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns G.S.R. 525(E) Returns and records Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 26 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Employer to furnish particulars of ownership and authorised signatories . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Identify the event, filing owner, data source, form and portal Identify the event, filing owner, data source, form and portal. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Use maker-checker validation and preserve acknowledgement Use maker-checker validation and preserve acknowledgement. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Maintain records in inspection-ready form and retain correction history Maintain records in inspection-ready form and retain correction history. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Employer to furnish particulars of ownership and authorised signatories”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Employer to furnish particulars of ownership and authorised signatories”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail prescribed form or electronic return maker-checker evidence portal acknowledgement correction log retention register Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Employer to furnish particulars of ownership and authorised signatories . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 25 Related provision Paragraph 27 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 25 Paragraph 27 →

Paragraph 27: Duties of principal employer and contractor | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 27 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 27 Paragraph 27: Duties of principal employer and contractor Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns G.S.R. 525(E) Returns and records Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 27 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Duties of principal employer and contractor . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Creates a three-way compliance chain among principal employer, contractor and employee Creates a three-way compliance chain among principal employer, contractor and employee. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Requires contractor-wise employee identification, wage and contribution statements and principal-employer verification Requires contractor-wise employee identification, wage and contribution statements and principal-employer verification. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Maps to Forms 10, 11 and 12 for declarations, contractor statements and monthly summary Maps to Forms 10, 11 and 12 for declarations, contractor statements and monthly summary. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Principal employer should block invoice payment where UAN, wage or remittance evidence is incomplete Principal employer should block invoice payment where UAN, wage or remittance evidence is incomplete. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Contractor Principal employer Code linkage Sections 17, 123, 125 and 129. Timing and trigger Before contractor onboarding, monthly before invoice release, and on contract closure. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail prescribed form or electronic return maker-checker evidence portal acknowledgement correction log retention register Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Duties of principal employer and contractor . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 26 Related provision Paragraph 28 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 26 Paragraph 28 →

Paragraph 28: Payment of contributions etc. | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 28 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 28 Paragraph 28: Payment of contributions etc. Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns G.S.R. 525(E) Contributions and default Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 28 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Payment of contributions etc. . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Requires electronic payment of contribution and charges within fifteen days after close of the month Requires electronic payment of contribution and charges within fifteen days after close of the month. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Employer bears remittance cost and remains accountable for direct and contract labour Employer bears remittance cost and remains accountable for direct and contract labour. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Electronic return, challan, bank confirmation and ledger must reconcile exactly Electronic return, challan, bank confirmation and ledger must reconcile exactly. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Late correction should not overwrite evidence of the original due date or default period Late correction should not overwrite evidence of the original due date or default period. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Employer / principal employer Payroll and compliance owner Code linkage Sections 16, 17, 127 and 128. Timing and trigger Within 15 days of the close of each month. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail wage register contribution computation electronic return/challan bank proof interest and damages working Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Payment of contributions etc. . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 27 Related provision Paragraph 29 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 27 Paragraph 29 →

Paragraph 29: Fixation of administrative charges or other fee | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 29 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 29 Paragraph 29: Fixation of administrative charges or other fee Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns G.S.R. 525(E) Contributions and default Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VI — Responsibilities, forms and returns Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 29 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Fixation of administrative charges or other fee . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Fix the correct wage base, rate, ceiling and responsible employer Fix the correct wage base, rate, ceiling and responsible employer. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Reconcile payroll, contractor data, return, challan and bank debit Reconcile payroll, contractor data, return, challan and bank debit. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Calculate interest, damages and correction exposure separately Calculate interest, damages and correction exposure separately. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Fixation of administrative charges or other fee”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Fixation of administrative charges or other fee”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties EPFO / authorised officer Employer or member, according to the transaction Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail wage register contribution computation electronic return/challan bank proof interest and damages working Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Fixation of administrative charges or other fee . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 28 Related provision Paragraph 30 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 28 Paragraph 30 →

Paragraph 30: Annual statement of member’s account and e-Pass Book | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 30 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 30 Paragraph 30: Annual statement of member’s account and e-Pass Book Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration G.S.R. 525(E) Fund and accounting Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 30 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Annual statement of member’s account and e-Pass Book . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Requires annual account statement and continuing electronic access through e-Pass Book or specified digital channel Requires annual account statement and continuing electronic access through e-Pass Book or specified digital channel. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Statement should show opening balance, employee and employer credits, transfers, withdrawals, interest and closing balance Statement should show opening balance, employee and employer credits, transfers, withdrawals, interest and closing balance. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Member-data mismatches should trigger a documented correction workflow rather than informal spreadsheet adjustment Member-data mismatches should trigger a documented correction workflow rather than informal spreadsheet adjustment. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Member / employee / claimant Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15 and 123. Timing and trigger Annual statement plus ongoing digital availability, subject to EPFO specifications. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail general ledger member sub-ledger bank and investment reconciliation valuation/audit report board approval Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Annual statement of member’s account and e-Pass Book . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 29 Related provision Paragraph 31 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 29 Paragraph 31 →

Paragraph 31: Current Account | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 31 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 31 Paragraph 31: Current Account Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration G.S.R. 525(E) Fund and accounting Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 31 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Current Account . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Current Account”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Current Account”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail general ledger member sub-ledger bank and investment reconciliation valuation/audit report board approval Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Current Account . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 30 Related provision Paragraph 32 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 30 Paragraph 32 →

Paragraph 32: Administration Account | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 32 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 32 Paragraph 32: Administration Account Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration G.S.R. 525(E) Fund and accounting Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 32 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Administration Account . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Administration Account”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Administration Account”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail general ledger member sub-ledger bank and investment reconciliation valuation/audit report board approval Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Administration Account . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 31 Related provision Paragraph 33 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 31 Paragraph 33 →

Paragraph 33: Provident Fund Account | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 33 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 33 Paragraph 33: Provident Fund Account Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration G.S.R. 525(E) Fund and accounting Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 33 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Provident Fund Account . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Provident Fund Account”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Provident Fund Account”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail general ledger member sub-ledger bank and investment reconciliation valuation/audit report board approval Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Provident Fund Account . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 32 Related provision Paragraph 34 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 32 Paragraph 34 →

Paragraph 34: Interest Account | Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 | Finin2min Labour EPFO Schemes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 › Paragraph 34 Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 · Paragraph 34 Paragraph 34: Interest Account Paragraph-wise legal explanation, implementation control, evidence, remedy and transition mapping for Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026. Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration G.S.R. 525(E) Fund and accounting Scheme Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 Location Chapter VII — Accounts and Fund administration Notification G.S.R. 525(E) Source review 2026-07-17 What this paragraph regulates Paragraph 34 is the canonical current-scheme provision for Interest Account . It must be read with the Code on Social Security, 2020, the defined terms, current Central Government notifications, EPFO implementation directions and saved legacy rights. Legal source: Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, notified under section 15(1)(a) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. It supersedes Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, except for things already done or omitted before supersession. Open Gazette copy Paragraph-specific legal and control map Control 1: Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers Separate benefit fund, administration account and member ledgers. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 2: Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls Follow approved investment, valuation, audit and reporting controls. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 3: Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance Reconcile opening balance, inflows, benefits, expenses, income and closing balance. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Control 4: Apply the control specifically to “Interest Account”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process Apply the control specifically to “Interest Account”, rather than treating it as a generic EPFO process. Implementation test: Identify the responsible person, source data, statutory event, approval and retained evidence for this control. A payroll label or portal status alone is not conclusive where underlying facts differ. Responsible parties Central Board / EPFO Commissioner / authorised officer Code linkage Sections 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 123, 125–129, 143, 151, 153 and 164, as context requires. Timing and trigger Event-driven or periodic according to the paragraph; confirm the current EPFO portal and implementation direction before action. Decision questions Is the establishment and person covered on the event date? Is this a current-scheme event, a saved legacy event or a correction? Which wage, service, balance, family or fund data is legally relevant? Which form, portal, authority and evidence are required? Evidence and audit trail general ledger member sub-ledger bank and investment reconciliation valuation/audit report board approval Minimum review controls Maker-checker sign-off tied to employee/member ID. Reconciliation to payroll, contractor, fund and bank records where relevant. Current rate, ceiling, circular and portal version check. Exception log and legal basis for overrides or delayed correction. Retention of acknowledgement, order and proof of payment/benefit. Non-compliance, remedy and escalation Possible consequences include contribution assessment, interest, damages, recovery, penalty, benefit correction, delayed-claim interest, cancellation of exemption or litigation. The exact pathway depends on whether the issue concerns coverage, contribution, a Fund decision, a member benefit or an exempted establishment. Employer correction Correct master data, return and remittance with a preserved audit trail; do not overwrite the original default. Member/claimant remedy Use the prescribed claim, grievance, review or appeal route with complete supporting evidence. Authority action Assessment, interest, damages and recovery should be separately quantified and linked to the applicable Code order. Worked control scenario An establishment receives a transaction or employee event that falls within Interest Account . The compliance owner first fixes the event date and member status, then retrieves wage/service/nomination or fund data as relevant. The maker prepares the statutory computation or claim; an independent reviewer checks the Code link, paragraph conditions, current ceiling/rate and prior transactions. Only after reconciliation is the portal filing or payment completed. The acknowledgement, calculation and supporting records are retained together. Failure pattern: treating an EPFO portal acceptance as proof that the underlying legal classification, wage base or claimant entitlement is correct. Portal processing does not eliminate assessment, recovery, damages, benefit-revision or competing-claim risk. Practical Q&A Can a contract or payroll policy override this paragraph? No. A contract may allocate operational responsibility but cannot reduce statutory liability or member entitlement. Can an old-scheme paragraph still matter? Yes, for things done, omitted, accrued or pending before supersession. Document the event date and savings basis; do not mix historic and current rules. Is the Gazette page alone enough for live compliance? No. Check later notifications, EPFO circulars, portal specifications, court orders and establishment-specific exemption orders. Related provisions Paragraph 33 Related provision Paragraph 35 Related provision Code section 15 — Schemes Related provision Code section 16 — Funds Related provision ← Paragraph 33 Paragraph 35 →