Employees Providen Fund Organization Regional Office, Indore vs Anil Agarwal Liquidator of S.T.L Exports Pvt. Ltd.

(Hybrid Mode)

I.A. No. 1202 of 2026: This is an application praying for condonation of delay of 15 days in filing of the appeal.

The appeal has been filed by the EPFO, Regional Office, Indore. Thereafter receiving the order, the Appellant forwarded the penal counsel to file appeal and some time was taken for preparation of appeal. We find sufficient cause shown by the Appellant for condonation of delay. Delay condoned.

Heard Ld. Counsel for the Appellant and Respondent.

This appeal has been filed against the order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the NCLT, Indore Bench by which I.A No. 219 of 2025 filed by the Appellant to accept its delayed claim has been rejected.

Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant was informed about the liquidation after commencement of the liquidation, hence, claim could not be filed within the time. The Adjudicating Authority heard the parties and has taken the view that the liquidation commencement date is 11.08.2023 whereas the basis for which claim has been filed were all subsequent to said liquidation commencement date. In paras 11 to 14 the Adjudicating Authority has made following observations :-

It is observed that the Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor commenced on 11.08.2023. However, the assessment order under Section 7A, 7Q and 14B of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 was passed on 04.11.2024, 13.11.2024 and 14.11.2024, all subsequent to the commencement of the liquidation proceedings. The relevant details are placed in the tabular form below:

Recently, on 25.11.2025, the NCLAT, Principal Bench (New Delhi) in Regional PF Commissioner II Vashi Vs. Harish Kant Kaushik (RP) of Protocol Marine Service Ltd. (Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 159 of 2025 & I.A. No. 639 of 2025), held that claim for PF damages and interest arising from an order passed after the Liquidation Commencement Date cannot be allowed. The relevant extract of the order is given below:

Adjudicating Authority has given reasons for not accepting the claim pertaining to damages and interest in para-6, which is as follows:

"The claim of Rs. 1,82,824/- and Rs. 96,686/-, pertains to damages and interest demanded for delayed remittances for the period July, 2019 to December, 2020 and this Claim has been raised by order dt. 05.02.2024, passed by Regional PF Commissioner II, Vashi. This Order has been passed after the commencement of Liquidation i.e. 04.12.2023. It is trite law that the claim of debt as on the Liquidation Commencement date has to be settled and no claim can arise from any Order passed after the Liquidation Commencement Date. Accordingly, the said claim is not permissible."

The perusal of the order indicates that order with respect to interests and damages was passed on 05.02.2024 and the reasons given by the Adjudicating Authority in para 6 cannot be faulted with for not accepting the claim which arose after the liquidation commencement date. The issue raised in this appeal is fully covered by CA (AT) (Ins.) No. 17 of 2025, EPFO Vs. CA Pankaj Sah, decided on 03.09.2025.

We, thus, are of the view that no error has been committed by Adjudicating Authority in partly allowing the claim of the Appellant. There is no merit in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed.

Recently, on 29.08.2025, the NCLAT, Principal Bench (New Delhi) in The Regional P.F. Commissioner, EPFO Vs. Alok Kailash Saksena Liquidator of Gujarat Foils Ltd. and Anr. (Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 807 of 2025) held that only claims in existence as on the liquidation commencement date and filed within the prescribed period are entertainable.

Further, the Hon'ble NCLAT Principal Bench, in Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Nashik vs. Girish Siriram Juneja & Anr., in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 693 of 2025 and I.A. No. 2676 of 2025, made certain observations which are relevant and applicable to the present case. The relevant portions of the said order passed by the Hon'ble NCLAT are reproduced below:

Any claim which arises after liquidation commencement date cannot be entertained by the Liquidator as per the statutory scheme under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016. Claim under 7Q and 14B arose only on 23.10.2023 i.e. subsequent to liquidation commencement date. The Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error in not accepting the said claim. We, thus, do not find any ground Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.693 of 2025 to interfere in the order rejecting claim filed by the Appellant. There is no merit in the appeal. Appeal is dismissed."

We are of the view that the Adjudicating Authority has rightly not considered the claim which arose subsequent to the liquidation commencement date and as per the relevant Regulations the claim as existing on the liquidation commencement date can be considered in the liquidation proceedings. Ld. Counsel for the Liquidator further submits that liquidation proceedings are already over and completed.

We do not find any error in the impugned order. The appeal is dismissed.