CHECKMATE SERVICES P LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I

C.A. No.-002833-002833 - 2016Supreme Court2022 INSC 106912 October 2022Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE34 pages
For Petitioner: AARTHI RAJANFor Respondent: RAJ BAHADUR YADAV
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court held that employee contributions to provident and ESI funds, if deposited after the due date, are not deductible. The court emphasized that Section 36(1)(va) requires such deposits to be made on or before the due date for deductibility, and Section 43B does not override this condition for employee contributions.

What were the facts?

The appeals concerned the interpretation of Section 36(1)(va) and Section 43B of the IT Act regarding the deductibility of employee contributions to provident and ESI funds deposited belatedly. The Assessing Officers disallowed deductions for late deposits, considering them income under Section 2(24)(x) and not deductible under Section 36(1)(va).

What were the issues?

Whether belated deposit of employee contributions to provident and ESI funds are eligible for deduction under the Income Tax Act. Whether Section 43B overrides the due date requirement for deductibility of employee contributions under Section 36(1)(va).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 43B,Section 2(24)(x)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 1,408 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

Cases cited in this judgment(13)Show 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.

1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURI ICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2833 OF 2016

CHECKMATE SERVICES P. LTD. …APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 …RESPONDENT(S)

WITH C.A. No. 2830/2016 C.A. No.159/2019 C.A. No.2832/2016 C.A. No.2831/2016 C.A. _____________________2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.23388/2019) C.A._____________________2022 Arising out of SLP(C) No.23295/2019 C.A. ____________________2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos.4971-4973/2020) C.A. _____________________2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.4241/2020) C.A. _____________________2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.17739/2019) C.A. _____________________2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.3250/2019) C.A. _____________________2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.1358/2019) C.A. _____________________2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.25483/2019) C.A. _____________________2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.32361/2015) C.A. _____________________2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.24548/2016)

2

J U D G M E N T

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

All 6,054 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(va) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →