EPFO claim during CIRP moratorium rejected where demand was not crystallised under Section 7A and report came later.

EPFO claims based on an Area Enforcement Report generated after commencement of CIRP, where the demand had not been crystallised under Section 7A, were treated as inadmissible during the moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The Tribunal noted that continuation of assessment proceedings during CIRP was barred, and the delay in lodging the claim with the absence of a pre-existing adjudicated demand supported rejection. The refusal to admit the EPFO claim was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the EPFO claim based on an Area Enforcement Report, submitted after commencement of CIRP and before crystallisation of the demand under Section 7A, could be admitted in the insolvency proceedings.

Analysis: The claim was founded on an Area Enforcement Report dated after commencement of CIRP, and the demand under Section 7A had not been crystallised before the claim was lodged. The moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code barred continuation of such assessment proceedings during CIRP. The delay in filing the claim and the absence of a pre-existing adjudicated demand supported the rejection of the application. The view taken was consistent with the earlier decision of the Tribunal relied upon in the order.

Conclusion: The claim was not admissible, and the rejection of the application was upheld against the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The order refusing admission of the EPFO claim was affirmed, and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A claim by the EPFO based on an Area Enforcement Report generated after commencement of CIRP, where the demand has not been crystallised under Section 7A, cannot be admitted during the moratorium period.

---