Moratorium-hit EPFO assessments cannot support insolvency claims, and an approved resolution plan need not be disturbed for nominal dues.

Claims founded on assessment proceedings initiated or revised during the moratorium period under insolvency law are not admissible in CIRP, particularly where they are unsupported by contemporaneous deduction records in the corporate debtor's books. The later assessment cannot fasten liability in the insolvency process because the moratorium bars such proceedings. A duly approved resolution plan will also not be disturbed merely because it provides only a nominal amount for disputed provident fund dues, where the claim was already noted in the information memorandum and considered within the plan framework. The appeal therefore failed and the resolution plan approval was upheld.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether EPFO assessment and demand raised during the moratorium period could form the basis of an admissible claim in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. (ii) Whether the approved resolution plan could be interfered with for providing only a nominal amount towards EPFO dues.

Issue (i): Whether EPFO assessment and demand raised during the moratorium period could form the basis of an admissible claim in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.

Analysis: The claim of the provident fund authority was not supported by contemporaneous deduction records in the corporate debtor's books and the assessment was initiated and revised only after commencement of CIRP and during the moratorium. A claim founded on assessment proceedings undertaken in the moratorium period could not be admitted in CIRP. The statutory bar on continuing or initiating such proceedings during moratorium was treated as decisive, and the later assessment was held incapable of fastenings liability in the insolvency process.

Conclusion: The claim based on assessment made during moratorium was not admissible in CIRP and the objection failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the approved resolution plan could be interfered with for providing only a nominal amount towards EPFO dues.

Analysis: The resolution professional had taken note of the provident fund claim, included it in the information memorandum, and the successful resolution applicant made a provision in the plan. The plan had already been approved by the committee of creditors and the adjudicating authority. In these circumstances, the amount provided for the disputed provident fund dues fell within the commercial framework of the plan and did not warrant judicial interference, especially when the claim itself was founded on a moratorium-hit assessment.

Conclusion: The approved plan was not liable to be set aside on the ground of inadequate provision for EPFO dues.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, and the approval of the resolution plan was upheld with the connected applications also disposed of.

Ratio Decidendi: Claims founded on assessment proceedings initiated or continued during moratorium under the insolvency law cannot be admitted in CIRP, and a duly approved resolution plan will not be disturbed on that basis.

---