CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.

321 ITR 508High Court2010#20 most cited

What is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. authority for?

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

1,629

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,302 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. · AIMIL Ltd. · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · employee contribution PF ESIC · delayed deposit provident fund · deposit before 139(1) due date · disallowance 143(1) adjustment · actual payment basis PF ESIC · Section 2(24)(x) · due date for payment of employee contribution

Also reported as

188 Taxmann 265229 CTR 118

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(va)Section 143(1)Section 1961Section 43BSection 139(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 143(1)(a)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 43(b)section 36(va)section 34(1)(iv)section 3(b)section 43b(b)section 34(1)actual payment basissection 36(1)(iv)section 2(24)(x)section 2(24)section 36(1)(va)section 34

Judgments citing CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.

Gangotri Health Care & Research Pvt. Ltd., Darjeeling vs. CPC, Bagalore(ACIT, Cir. 1, Siliguri), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 580/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar] I.T.A. No. 580/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Gangotri Health Care & Research Vs. Cpc, Bangalore [Acit, Cir-1, Pvt. Ltd. Siliguri] (Pan: Aafcg7852G) Appellant Respondent

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Earthbags Export (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 574/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Jayanta Chakraborty, Durgapur vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Durgapur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 568/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. A.O. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 500/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 499 & 500/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Pan: Adhpg7436L) Appellant Respondent

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. A.O. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 499/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 499 & 500/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Tarit Kumar Ghosh Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Pan: Adhpg7436L) Appellant Respondent

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Orange Securitas Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.O. Cir. 6(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 490/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar] I.T.A. No. 490/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Orange Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. A.O., Circle-6(2), Kolkata (Pan: Aaaco 8239 L) Appellant Respondent

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Premier Irrigation Adritee Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 481/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar] I.T.A. No. 481/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Premier Irrigation Adritec Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata (Pan: Aafcm 4800 Q) Appellant Respondent

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Diamond Engineering, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 473/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 472 & 473/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Diamond Engineering Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Pan:Aacfd5820F) Appellant Respondent

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Diamond Engineering, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 472/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 472 & 473/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Diamond Engineering Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Pan:Aacfd5820F) Appellant Respondent

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Hind Electric & Trading Co., Kolkata vs. CPC/ITO, WD-40(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 464/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 464/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Arun Kumar Biswas, Bishnupur vs. ITO, Ward-26(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 408/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. Nos. 370 & 408/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

M/S Jayanta Food Products, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 384/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. Nos. 383 & 384/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

M/S Jayanta Food Products, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 383/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. Nos. 383 & 384/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Arun Kumar Biswas, Bishnupur vs. ITO, Ward-26(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 370/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. Nos. 370 & 408/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Shyamal Banerjee, Purulia vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 502/KOL/2021[502]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 502/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 Shyamal Banerjee Vs. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi (Pan:Adupb0408N) Appellant Respondent

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

…in favor of the revenue, however the Hon’ble High Court in that case (Bharat Hotels Ltd.) had not considered the earlier Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court which was binding on a Division Bench in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. &Ors. Reported in 321 ITR 508 (Delhi) wherein the head notes reads as under: “Late deposit of PF and ESI - During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had deposited employers’ contribution as well as employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI after the due date, as prescribed under the relevant Act/Rules. Accordingly, he m…

Pragati Fashions P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dycti (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 569/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalepragati Fashions P Ltd., Vs. Dycti (Cpc) F.P.No. 455, Shree 1 St Floor, Prestige Sadguru Heights, Alpha, Bhavani Shankar Road, Beratenagrahara, Dadar (W) Hosur Road, Uttahalli Mumbai-400028. Hobli,Bangalore- 560100 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp1730H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Girish Dave.Sr.Counsel Respondent By : Shri. S.G. Menon.Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21.02.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

For Appellant: Shri. Girish Dave.Sr.CounselFor Respondent: Shri. S.G. Menon.Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…oviso by Finance Act, 2003 are curative in nature and are effective retrospectively, i.e., with effect from 1.4.1988 i.e., the date of insertion of first proviso. The Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V. Amil Ltd. reported Pragati Fashions P Ltd, Mumbai. in 321 ITR 508 held that if the assessee had deposited employee's contribution towards Provident Fund and ESI after due date as prescribed under the relevant Act, but before the due date of filing of return under the Income Tax Act, no disallowance could be made in view of the provisions of Section 43B as amended by Finance Act, 2003. 6. In the present case, th…

Wellman Employment India Private Limited, Delhi vs. Circle-27(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1964/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250(6)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ted 10th September, 2018 following the earlier judgment of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. (supra) had decided this issue in the following manner: “In view of the judgment of the Division Bench of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax versus Aimil Limited, (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Del) the issue is covered against the Revenue and, therefore, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. The legislative intent was/is to ensure that the amount paid is allowed as an expenditure only when payment is actually made. We do not think that the legislative intent and objective is to treat belated payment o…

Wellman Employment India Private Limited, Delhi vs. Ward-25(1), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1963/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250(6)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ted 10th September, 2018 following the earlier judgment of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. (supra) had decided this issue in the following manner: “In view of the judgment of the Division Bench of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax versus Aimil Limited, (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Del) the issue is covered against the Revenue and, therefore, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. The legislative intent was/is to ensure that the amount paid is allowed as an expenditure only when payment is actually made. We do not think that the legislative intent and objective is to treat belated payment o…

Pawan Kumar, Haryana vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1924/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ctive statute. Various decisions were cited on behalf of the assessee including the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of CIT vs. Atom Extrusions (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) and Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Del.) and catena of other judgments. The ld. First Appellate Authority relied upon amendment brought by the Finance Act, 2021 in the provisions of section 43B and the CBDT Circular No.22/2015 and also noted that there were conflicting decision of Hon’ble High Courts including that of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court which were in favour as well…

Pawan Kumar, Haryana vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1923/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ctive statute. Various decisions were cited on behalf of the assessee including the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of CIT vs. Atom Extrusions (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) and Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Del.) and catena of other judgments. The ld. First Appellate Authority relied upon amendment brought by the Finance Act, 2021 in the provisions of section 43B and the CBDT Circular No.22/2015 and also noted that there were conflicting decision of Hon’ble High Courts including that of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court which were in favour as well…