Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2026 (4) TMI 1839

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1670/2025 filed by the appellant has been dismissed. 2. The appellant has filed the claim with 9 months delay before the Resolution Professional (RP) and has further prayed that claim under 7A, 7Q and 14B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 be admitted. Adjudicating authority heard the parties and noticed the fact that claim of the appellant was filed on basis of Area Enforcement Report dated 22.08.2024 and Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) has commenced on 19.12.2023, on the said ground, the adjudicating authority rejected the application. Following observations have been made in paragraphs 5 to 7 of the order: "5. In this case the CIRP commenced on 19.12.2023 and the moratorium ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessment proceeding to be conducted by statutory Authorities, including the EPFO. Thus, after the liquidation, it is open for EPFO to carry on the assessment. Section 33(5), cannot be held to apply on assessment proceedings. However, while looking to the expression used in Section 14(1), assessment proceedings before the EPFO, cannot be continued after initiation of CIRP. 7. It is also pertinent to note that the said report itself record the fact that the Corporate Debtor had remitted the dues upto May 2022 and thereafter, minimum administrative charges at the rate of Rs. 500 per month upto November 2023. In the case of Himachal Pradesh State Forest Corporation V/s Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (2008) 5 Supreme Court Cases....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l' Vs. 'National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai' in [Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1691/2024], where in paragraph 15, the claim was also on the basis of AEOR Report, which is the same as in the present case. Paragraph 15 of the judgment is as follows: "15. Recapitulating the facts of the present case, it is indisputable that moratorium had come into play with effect from 02.12.2019. The last date for filing claims by the creditors was 22.06.2022. Nothing has been placed on record to show that claims were filed by EPFO on or by 22.06.2022. The claim was submitted by the EPFO on 06.03.2023 which date was however before the approval of the resolution plan by the CoC. It is also pertinent to note that the EPFO claim was premised on the AEOR ....