← All Phrases

“section 43B disallowance”

DisallowancesSection 43BSection 43B9 judgments

The decision most relied on for section 43B disallowance is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on section 43B disallowance

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.
321 ITR 508 · 2010 · High Court
1,629
citing judgments

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).

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · Supreme Court
1,392
citing judgments

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).

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
366 ITR 170 · 2014 · High Court
1,158
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund, are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the respective welfare statutes, even by a single day. Such delayed deposits are not cured even if made before the income-tax return filing due date.

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises
298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court
706
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

(i) CIT v. Merchem Ltd.
378 ITR 443 · 2015 · High Court
631
citing judgments

Belated remittance of employees' contribution to ESI and PF, even if deposited before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1), is not allowed as a deduction. This disallowance falls under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x), as Section 43B applies only to employer's contributions.

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court
524
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
366 ITR 408 · 2014 · High Court
519
citing judgments

An employer's delayed remittance of employees' contributions to provident fund (PF) or Employees' State Insurance (ESI) is deductible if the payment is made before the due date for filing the income tax return under section 139(1), applying the provisions of section 43B and notwithstanding section 36(1)(va).

CIT v. Bharat Hotels Ltd.
410 ITR 417 · 2019 · High Court
486
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI, if paid beyond the due date prescribed by the respective welfare fund statutes, are not allowed as a deduction under the Income Tax Act.

Judgments citing section 43B disallowance

Sgd Pharma India Private Limited, Mahabubnagar vs. DCIT, Circle -3 (1), Hyderabad

ITA 130/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita-Tp Nos.130 & 447/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/S. Sgd Pharma India Vs. Dy.Cit/I.T.O Private Limited, Mahabubnagar Pan:Aadcc7815K (Appellant) Ward/Circle 3 (1) Hyderabad (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Smt. K. Haritha, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 21/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: Both These Appeals Are Filed By M/S. Sgd Pharma India Private Limited (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. Ao”) Under Section 143(3) Read With Sections 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act") Dated 25.02.2022 & 27.07.2022 For A.Y 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively In Pursuance Of The Directions Issued By The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (“Ld. Drp”). Since Identical Issues Are Involved In These Two Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 270ASection 40A(7)Section 43BSection 92C

ITA No 130 and 447 of 2022 SGD Pharma India P Ltd आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. M/S Yamuna Industries Limited, Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 5282/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, Vs. M/S. Yamuna Industries Ltd., Delhi F-572, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaacy1419N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

hearing that the CIT(A)/NFAC herein has erred in law and on facts in reversing the Assessing Officer’s action invoking section 43B disallowance of Rs.6,01,203/- in assessment order dated 31st December, 2019. 3. That being the case, the learned departmental representative could hardly dispute the lower

ACIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Dewan Sugars Limited, Uttar Pradesh

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3613/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Sh. Divya Chadha, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 43B

note with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned CIT(A) has reversed the Assessing Officer’s action invoking section 43B disallowance in the assessee’s case amounting to Rs.76,51,32,853/- in section 143(1) processing dated 03.05.2024; reading as under: “4. Decision

Intas Biopharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, R-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1035/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 14ASection 35Section 43B

partly allowed for statistical purpose. 8. As regards to Ground No. 3 relating to disallowance of Rs. 34,40,536/- on account of Section 43B disallowance, the Ld. AR submitted that the amount of Rs. 2014/- represent short payment out of amount of interest provided in respect of DBT Soft

Nse Clearing Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3719/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm A.Y.2020-21 Nse Clearing Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Exchange Plaza, Bandra Income Tax-Circle 7(1)(1), Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai Mumbai Vs.

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43B

verify that if such payment is made on the dates specified by the assessee, the addition should be deleted. On the issue of section 43B disallowance, it was submitted that Rs. 19,76,22,524/- were outstanding as on the last day of the accounting year. However, before

Tokai Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Hingoli vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-(1), Jalna

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 571/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri G.D.Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.571/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Tokai Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Vs Ward-1, Jalna. Villag Kurunda, Taluka Basmath . District, Hingoli – 431512. Pan: Aaat6997Q Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Anand Partani – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 16/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/01/2024

Section 194ASection 250Section 270ASection 37(1)Section 40aSection 43B

withdraw any grounds of appeal at or before the time of Appeal hearing.” 3. We advert to the first and foremost issue of section 43B disallowance of the assessee’s interest claim of Rs.3,13,44,000/-. The Revenue’s case all along in light of learned lower authorities’ findings

J.S.Fourwheel Motors (P) Ltd, Alwar vs. ACIT. Circle 1 Alwar, Alwar

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

ITA 423/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 144Section 24

Appeals), has erred in not giving any finding thereon and also erred in not disposing off the this ground on merit. 6. Section 43B Disallowance on account of non-payment of sum before due date of filing of return of income. That the ld. assessing officer has erred

M/S United Breweries Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 481/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT –DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

account. The CIT(A) however held that the assessee has claimed an expenditure which is yet to be paid and is liable to section 43B disallowance [para 7.3 page 23 of the impugned order of the CIT(A)]. The CIT(A) therefore upheld the addition made

Mr.Nanjunda Renuka Aradhya, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 397/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 194CSection 194C(2)Section 206ASection 40Section 43B

dues to the government, in effect, the appellant has claimed an expenditure which is yet to be paid and is liable to section 43B disallowance. On this issue, the ITAT, Bangalore in the case of M/s Jain Christopher and Srikanth VS. DCIT (ITA No.855/Bang/2012) vide order dated 12.4.2013 has made