Moratorium under insolvency law bars provident fund recovery proceedings that may create pecuniary liability during insolvency.

During the section 14 moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, proceedings under section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, and the resulting recovery notices, were treated as barred because they could create pecuniary liability against the corporate debtor. The proceedings were not viewed as merely administrative assessments, but as evidentiary determinations capable of leading to interest, damages, and penalty, and their continuation would undermine the object of preserving the debtor as a going concern and collecting claims within insolvency. The absence of employee-wise particulars also supported the unsustainability of the demands as issued.

---

---

Issues: Whether proceedings and consequential recovery notices issued under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act during the moratorium period were barred by section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Analysis: The moratorium under section 14 is a complete statutory bar on institution or continuation of proceedings against the corporate debtor, including actions that may result in monetary liability. Proceedings under section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act were held to be not merely administrative assessments but proceedings with evidentiary determination leading to possible pecuniary liability, including interest, damages, and penalty. Such proceedings, if continued during moratorium, would amount to pecuniary attacks on the corporate debtor and would defeat the purpose of preserving the debtor as a going concern and enabling collation of claims in the insolvency process. The absence of employee-wise particulars also reinforced that the impugned demands were unsustainable in the form in which they were made.

Conclusion: The impugned orders and recovery notices were held to be in violation of the moratorium and were set aside in favour of the petitioner.

---