Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

143 Taxmann.com 178Supreme Court of India2022#28 most cited

What is Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

1,392

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Checkmate Services · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · employees contribution to PF · ESI payment · due date for deposit · Section 143(1) disallowance · delayed payment of PF/ESI · Provident Fund · Employee State Insurance · 448 ITR 518 · 143 Taxmann.com 178

Also reported as

448 ITR 518218 DTR 401

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(va)Section 143(1)Section 43BSection 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 139(1)Section 250Section 37(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 36(1)(iv)section 143(1)(a)(iv)section 34(1)(iv)section 2(24)(x)employees contribution to pfsection 36(1)(va)section 43b(b)section 34(1)section 2(24)section 43bsection 36(1)section 36

Judgments citing Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Manjusha Anil Lodha L/H of Late Shri Anil Bansilal Lodha, Nashik vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, all appeals of different assessees are dismissed

ITA 82/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee‘s share as having the same character as that of the employer‘s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer‘s share and employees‘ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer‘s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Anuja Sanjay Mahajan, Kolhapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, all appeals of different assessees are dismissed

ITA 58/PUN/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee‘s share as having the same character as that of the employer‘s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer‘s share and employees‘ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer‘s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Amit Dilip Gandhi, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), Pune

In the result, all appeals of different assessees are dismissed

ITA 40/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee‘s share as having the same character as that of the employer‘s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer‘s share and employees‘ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer‘s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Inox Air Products Private Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cricle 1(1), Pune

In the result, all appeals of different assessees are dismissed

ITA 39/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee‘s share as having the same character as that of the employer‘s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer‘s share and employees‘ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer‘s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Arun Popat Kusalkar, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, all appeals of different assessees are dismissed

ITA 38/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee‘s share as having the same character as that of the employer‘s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer‘s share and employees‘ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer‘s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Millennium Engineers and Contractors Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle 1(3), Pune

In the result, all appeals of different assessees are dismissed

ITA 34/PUN/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee‘s share as having the same character as that of the employer‘s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer‘s share and employees‘ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer‘s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Shree Ashtvinayak Glass Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 290/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Ashoka Buildcon Limited, Nashik vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 235/PUN/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Ashoka Buildcon Limited, Nashik vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 234/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Baliraja Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 219/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Expert Global Solutions P. Ltd., Aurangabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 200/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Expert Global Solutions P. Ltd., Aurangabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 199/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Deesh Facilities Management P Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Director of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, all appeals of different assessees are dismissed

ITA 19/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee‘s share as having the same character as that of the employer‘s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer‘s share and employees‘ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer‘s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Netscout Systems India Private Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 189/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Guru Enterprises, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 186/PUN/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

M/S Enertech Ups P Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 134/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Hyt Engineering Co P Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Director of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 110/PUN/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

B S Enterprises, Nashik vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 109/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee’s share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Deepak Eknath Fulambrikar, Jalna vs. Income-Tax Officer Ward -1, Jalna

In the result, all appeals of different assessees are dismissed

ITA 102/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of treating the employee‘s share as having the same character as that of the employer‘s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b). Recently, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer‘s share and employees‘ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer‘s income u/s.2(24)(x), but the deduction for the same can be allowed only if s…

Allied Resource Management Services Aspire Private Limited, Pune vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, (CPC), Bangalore

ITA 444/PUN/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliasstt. Assessee’S Departmental Sr

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…share as having the same character as that of the employer’s share, becoming deductible u/s 36(1)(iv) read in the hue of section 43B(b) of the Act. 8. Lately, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in “Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. Vs CIT & Ors” reported in 448 ITR 518 has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. By the said judgement, the Hon’ble Lordships have now categorically held that, the contribution by the employees to the relevant funds is the employer’s income u/s 2(24)(x), but…