TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 403
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hok Bhushan , J : 1. This Appeal has been filed challenging the Judgement/Order dated 03rd January, 2022 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as "The Adjudicating Authority") in I.A. No. 290/KB/2021 in C.P. (IB) No. 1911/KB/2019. 2. Brief facts of the case for deciding this Appeal are:- The Adjudicating Authority vide Order dated 21st January, 2020 initiated "Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process" (hereinafter referred to as "CIRP") against the Corporate Debtor-HAIL Tea Limited. In pursuance of the Public Announcement, the Appellant-Organization submitted its claim in Form-B for an amount of Rs. 2,10,13,797.92/- on account of default on part of the Corporate D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Respondents opposed the Appeal. It is submitted that the Appeal is barred by time it having been filed on 28th February, 2022 challenging the Order dated 3rd January, 2022, ought to be rejected since limitation for filing an Appeal is only for 30 days. It is further submitted that approval of the Resolution Plan is in the domain of the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors. Haircut has been given to all the Financial Creditor(s) and Operational Creditor(s). 5. We have considered the submissions of Learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 6. There is no dispute between the parties regarding the amount of claim admitted by the Resolution Professional as was submitted by the Learned Counsel for the Appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Regional Provident Fund Commissioner verified to the extent of Rs.24,40,65,594/- arising out of an order dated 17.10.2018 passed under Section 14B of Employees' Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 can be treated as secured debt and the Appellant was entitled to receive the amount as secured creditors?" 8. The answer to the Question No. XI is in paragraphs 117, 118 and 119 of Judgement dated 21st October, 2022, which is to the following effect: "QUESTION - XI 117. In the appeal filed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, it has been pleaded that the claim was filed by the Appellant for an amount of Rs.24,40,65,594/- towards damages under Section 14B of Employees' Provident Funds & Miscella....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....missioner & Others, (2009) 10 SCC 123". The Hon'ble Supreme Court dealing with Section 11 of 1952 Act laid down following in Para 67: "67. The expression "any amount due from an employer" appearing in sub-section (2) of Section 11 has to be interpreted keeping in view the object of the Act and other provisions contained therein including sub-section (1) of Section 11 and Sections 7A, 7Q, 14B and 15(2) which provide for determination of the dues payable by the employer, liability of the employer to pay interest in case the payment of the amount due is delayed and also pay damages, if there is default in making contribution to the Fund. If any amount payable by the employer becomes due and the same is not paid within the stipulated t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mitted claim of the Appellant towards provident fund dues to save the plan from invalidity." 9. The facts of the present case are fully covered by the Judgement in Appeal filed by the "Regional P.F. Commissioner" i.e. Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 987 of 2022 dated 21.10.2022. The above Appeal had been allowed and direction has been issued to Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) to make the payment of Provident Funds dues in full. 10. The submissions of Learned Counsel for the Respondent that Appeal is barred by time, cannot be accepted. The Appeal has been filed on 28th February, 2022 against the Order dated 3rd January, 2022. The Judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition No. 03/2022 extended the period of limi....