JAI PRAKASH RAMAWAT,JAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. held that Section 43B does not apply to employee's PF/ESI contributions and the due date under Section 36(1)(va) is applicable. Therefore, the appeals were remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The appeals concerned additions made by the AO on account of late deposit of employees' contribution towards PF and ESI, which were confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee had deposited these contributions before the due date of filing the return.
What were the issues?
Whether late deposit of employees' contribution to PF/ESI is deductible when deposited before the due date of filing the return, considering the Supreme Court's ruling in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT1,392 citing143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR
Before: SHRI B. R. BASKARAN & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
O R D E R PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM
The above mentioned appeals are filed by different assessee’s against three different orders of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 10-11-2021, 1-07-2021 and 16-09-2022 for the assessment year 2018-19, 2018-19 and 2020-21 respectively confirming the addition of Rs.1,97,803/- Rs.53,59,210/- and Rs.76,790/- u/s 36(1)(va) of Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of late deposit of employees contribution towards PF and ESI Act.
None appeared on behalf of the above assessee’s on the issue in question when the case was called out for hearing.
On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC) Delhi.
After hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, the Bench noticed that the AO made the addition of Rs.1,97,803/- Rs.53,59,210/- and Rs.76,790/- u/s 36(1)(va) of Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of late deposit of employees contribution towards PF and ESI Act by the above mentioned assessee’s, holding it deemed income and subjected to tax in the hands of the employer which in first appeal was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) by holding that the said late payments are not covered under section 43B of the Act and thus the ld. CIT(A) dismissed this ground of the respective assessee’s. However, it is noted that the assessee has deposited employees contribution towards PF & ESI before due date of filing of return. Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT-1, 143 Taxmann.com 178 (SC)/Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016 held that the provision of Section 43B of the Act shall not apply to employee’s contribution to PF/ESI and the due date specified u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act shall apply for determination of deductibility of employee’s contribution to PF/ESI. Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra), the issue in these appeals being similar in nature are remanded back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication by providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee is directed to submit the necessary details/documents concerning the issue in question before the ld. CIT(A) in order to square up the case. Further, the assessee is also at liberty to take any other plea before the ld. CIT(A), if so advised. Thus these appeals of above mentioned assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)
- Vco Consulatatns and Sevices Private… vs ITO, Corporate Ward 3(3), ChennaiITA 2145/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- R K Swamy Limited, Chennai vs DCIT Non Corporate Circle 10(1), ChennaiITA 504/CHNY/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- M/S. R.K. Swamy Ltd., Chennai vs DCIT, Ncc-10(1), ChennaiITA 2822/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 839/IND/2025[2023-2024]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2023-2024
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 838/IND/2025[2022-2023]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2022-2023
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026
- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026