ARVIND,GURUGRAM vs. ITO, WARD 1(3), GURGAON
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that delayed payment of employees' contribution to PF and ESI, even if made before the due date of filing the return of income, is not eligible for deduction. This is in line with the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed a deduction for delayed payment of employees' contribution to PF and ESI. The CPC disallowed this deduction as the payment was not made within the due date prescribed under Section 36(1)(va). The first appellate authority sustained the disallowance.
What were the issues?
Whether delayed payment of employees' contribution to PF and ESI is eligible for deduction under the Income Tax Act, considering the due dates prescribed under the respective statutes and the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 36(1)(va),Section 2(24)(x),Section 43B,Section 139(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY
ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 13.12.2022 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21.
When the appeal was called out for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee.
It is observed, the notice of hearing issued to the assessee through speed post has returned back un-served as the assessee was not found in the given address.
Considering the nature of dispute and the fact that the issue is covered by a decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, I proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee after hearing learned Departmental Representative and the material available on record.
The dispute in the present appeal is confined to disallowance of deduction claimed in respect of delayed payment of employees contribution to Employees State Insurance (ESI) and Provident Fund (PF) amounting to Rs.23,32,110.
While processing the return filed by the assessee, the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) noticed that employees contribution to PF and ESI was not paid within the due date prescribed under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Accordingly, the deduction claimed by the assessee was disallowed.
Contesting the disallowance, the assessee preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. However, the disallowance was sustained.
I have heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the material on record.
Undoubtedly, the assessee has not paid the employees contribution to PF and ESI within the due date prescribed under the statute governing the payment of PF and ESI. Though, there was delay in payment of employees contribution to PF and ESI, however, the assessee still claimed the deduction on the plea that the payment was made within the due date of filing of return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act.
In my view, the aforesaid claim of the assessee is not acceptable in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 143 Taxmann. 178 (SC).
In the aforesaid decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that unless the assessee makes payment of employees contribution towards PF and ESI within the due date prescribed under the relevant statues, it has to be treated as assessee’s income under Section 2(24)(x) of the Act and no deduction can be claimed under Section 43B of the Act in respect of such payment. Thus, respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as discussed above, I uphold the disallowance. Ground raised is dismissed.
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 →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026