# In the matter of The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II vs. Vineeta Maheshwari,

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-09-08. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00481. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II filed an appeal challenging the Impugned Order…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 8 Sept 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00481
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/the-regional-provident-fund-commissioner-ii-vs-vineeta-maheshwari-3c2ec1c6

## Summary

### Background

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II filed an appeal challenging the Impugned Order dated 03.07.2024 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad, which dismissed an application (IA No. 516 of 2024) filed by Employees Provident Fund Organization for setting aside the communication dated 15.01.2024 issued by the Resolution Professional rejecting the Appellant's claims.

## Facts

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II filed an appeal against an order passed by the NCLT Ahmedabad.

The NCLT Ahmedabad dismissed an application by the Employees Provident Fund Organization to set aside a communication from the Resolution Professional rejecting their claims.

Bloom Dekor Limited was admitted to CIRP on 11.10.2023, and Vineeta Maheshwari was appointed as the IRP and then RP.

The Appellant's claim to the RP was rejected on 15.01.2024, leading to the filing of IA No. 516 of 2024.

The assessment order was passed on 23.10.2023, pertaining to the period from 01.07.2022 to 30.09.2023, but the proceedings for the assessment were initiated on 20.10.2023 after the admission of CD into CIRP on 11.10.2023.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether assessment proceedings under Section 7Q and 14B of the Employees' Provident Funds and …

**Ratio:** After the imposition of moratorium under Section 14 of the Code, the assessment cannot be

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal relied on the case of CA Pankaj Shah (Supra) and other judgments to support

…

**Interpretation:** The imposition of a moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC bars any assessment

…

**Application:** In this case, the EPFO's demand was based on an inspection report dated

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Rakesh Kuma…; Naresh Sa…
- **Appellants:** The Regional…
- **Respondents:** M/s Bloom Dekor…; Vineeta Mah…; +1 more
- **Advocates:** Sanket…; Himanshu…; +2 more

## Timeline

- **03.07.2024 — Impugned…**: Date of the Impugned Order passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench,…
- **11.10.2023 — CIRP Init…**: Bloom Dekor Limited was…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 14 — Moratorium](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-14)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/the-regional-provident-fund-commissioner-ii-vs-vineeta-maheshwari-3c2ec1c6