← All Phrases

“statutory dues”

DisallowancesSection 43BSection 43B297 judgments

The decision most relied on for statutory dues is CIT v. Alom Extrusion Ltd. (390 ITR 306), cited in 274 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on statutory dues

CIT v. Alom Extrusion Ltd.
390 ITR 306 · 2009 · Supreme Court
274
citing judgments

The amendment to the second proviso of Section 43B, introduced by the Finance Act, 2003, is curative in nature and applies retrospectively. This means employee contributions to welfare funds like ESI and PF are deductible if paid before the due date for filing the income tax return, even if paid beyond the statutory due date.

CIT v. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited
366 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court
206
citing judgments

Employees' contribution towards Provident Fund (PF) and Employees' State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) is allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B if deposited before the due date of filing the income tax return, even if deposited after the expiry of the statutory time period specified in the applicable fund's statute.

Kalpesh Synthetics (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
137 Taxmann.com 475 · 2022 · ITAT
198
citing judgments

A deduction claimed under Section 36(1)(va) for employee contributions remitted after the statutory due date but before the return filing due date cannot be disallowed during intimation processing under Section 143(1) if the issue is debatable. Such a disallowance cannot be made automatically based solely on auditor's mention of actual vs. due dates in the tax audit report.

Ghanashyam Mishra And Sons. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction
126 Taxmann.com 132 · 2021 · Supreme Court
192
citing judgments

Once a resolution plan is approved under Section 31(1) of the IBC, claims not included in the plan are extinguished and cannot be pursued. This applies to statutory dues owed to the government and other authorities.

Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT v. GTN Textiles Ltd.
269 ITR 285 · 2004 · High Court
176
citing judgments

Employee contributions towards ESI and PF are allowable as a deduction if paid by the due date for filing the income tax return, even if paid after the statutory due dates prescribed under the respective ESI/PF Acts.

Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. v. CIT
230 ITR 733 · 1998 · Supreme Court
130
citing judgments

The Supreme Court holds that interest paid under Section 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, for failure to deduct tax at source, is not an allowable business expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act.

Lachmandas Mathura v. CIT
254 ITR 799 · 2002 · Supreme Court
119
citing judgments

Interest paid on delayed payment of statutory dues, such as sales tax, service tax, TDS, and GST, is compensatory in nature rather than penal. Consequently, such interest is an allowable deduction in computing business profits.

CIT v. Noble and Hewitt (I) P. Ltd.
305 ITR 324 · 2008 · High Court
109
citing judgments

Section 43B of the Income-tax Act does not apply to disallow an amount (such as statutory dues like service tax or GST) if it has not been debited to the Profit & Loss account and no deduction for it has been claimed by the assessee.

Judgments citing statutory dues

ACIT(CC)-7(3), Mumbai vs. Lotus Logistics and Developers Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 137/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh Mehta and Shri Niraj Soni, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 43CSection 68Section 69C

Ground 3 raised by the revenue is in respect of addition of Rs.1,89,634/- made in respect of interest on delayed payments of statutory dues of MVAT, CGST, SGST and service tax. Details of the said expenditure is tabulated as under along with explanation given by the assessee ... According to the ld. AO, these expenses are not in relation with business expenditure as they are on account of default in respect of statutory dues and therefore, not allowable u/s. 37(1). Assessee made its submission to state that these expenses are compensatory only in nature

Mithlesh Kumar Tripathi, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-24(4), Delhi

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

ITA 4955/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 271(1)(c)

company for the FY 2011-12 and also the proof of expenditure incurred by the appellant on behalf of the companies towards remittance of statutory dues, taxes, insurance premium etc. which were carefully examined. 4.7 As per the entries in the ledger folio of the appellant as appearing

The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-1, Vadodara vs. Pawan Edifice Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara

Appeals are partly allowed for

ITA 529/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 68Section 80G

assessee argued that the interest on delayed payment of Service Tax and VAT was compensatory in nature, having the same character as the underlying statutory dues, and thus allowable as deduction under section 37(1) of the Act. Reliance was placed on various judicial precedents, including the decision ... loss of use of money, and not penal. Following this principle, co-ordinate benches have consistently held that interest for delayed payment of statutory dues, including VAT and service tax, is compensatory and hence allowable under section 37(1). In Stylam Industries Ltd. v. ACIT (ITA No. 363/Chd/2018, order dated

Pawan Edifice Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Vadodara

Appeals are partly allowed for

ITA 478/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 68Section 80G

assessee argued that the interest on delayed payment of Service Tax and VAT was compensatory in nature, having the same character as the underlying statutory dues, and thus allowable as deduction under section 37(1) of the Act. Reliance was placed on various judicial ITA Nos.477-478 & 529/Ahd/2024 Pawan Edifice

Pawan Edifice Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Vadodara

ITA 477/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 68Section 80G

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, अहमदाबाद न्यायपीठ “C”, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सुश्री सुचित्रा काम्बले, न्यायिक

Universal Trading Company Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 223/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115Section 115JSection 154Section 237Section 244ASection 250

payment in the form of taxes from the angle of the assessee. As far as assessee is concerned, it had simply discharged the statutory dues comprising of tax, surcharge and cess to the Union of India and hence if paid in excess, would be eligible for either refund or adjustment

DCIT-Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Navkar Corporation Limited, Navi Mumbai

In the result, we affirm the order of the Ld

ITA 1846/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 32Section 80Section 801ASection 801A(4)(i)Section 801A(5)Section 801A(8)Section 80I

Interest for late payment of MSME Creditors = 2,53,475 Penalty for late filing of statutory Returns = 19,831 Interest on lat payment of statutory dues 20,96,21,986- TDS = 2,91,225 Less: Allowable as deduction Depreciation as per income tax act, 1961 = 30,56,35,346 Earlier

Asianet Satellite Communications Limited, Thiruvananthapuram vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 473/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 37(1)

compensatory in nature, the same is allowable deduction. The submission of the appellant that interest is paid for belated remittance of the statutory dues remains uncontroverted by the learned DR and the interest is nothing but a compensatory in nature and, therefore, the same is allowable as deduction as held

Calyx Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer CC 4, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2500/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarcalyx Chemicals & V/S. Income Tax Officer, Pharmaceuticals Limited, बनाम Centre Circle – 4, Thane, 1408, 14Th Floor, Real Tech Maharashtra Park, Sector – 30A, Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400 703, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcc1457B Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Narayan Atal, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan (Sr. DR)
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 37

such, even without the 2019 amendment, the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority to whom a debt is owed, including the statutory dues, would be covered by the term 'creditor' and in any case, by the term 'other stakeholders' as provided in sub section (1) of Section ... therefore will be effective from the date on which I&B Code has come into effect; 102.3 Consequently, all the dues including the statutory dues owed to the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority, if not part of the resolution plan, shall stand eXtin- guished

Darshit Gunwantbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 571/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2021-22 Darshit Gunantbhai Shah Ito, Ward-1(2)(1) B/2/236, Madhuvrund Society Vs. Ahmedabad. Ghatlodia Ahmedabad 380 061. Pan : Awmps 9760 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Assessee By : Shri Umesh Kumar Agrawal, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] Dated 25.01.2023 For The Assessment Year 2021– 22, Wherein The Disallowance Of Rs.4,67,802/- Made Under Section 43B Of The Act By The Was Confirmed.

For Appellant: Shri Umesh Kumar Agrawal, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 43B

made before the due date of filing the return of income under section 139(1). 7.2 It is the consistent judicial view that if statutory dues are actually paid before the due date of filing return, then the deduction under section 43B cannot be denied. In the present case

Arcpl Developers Private Limited, Indore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1), Indore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 731/IND/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 156A(1)Section 5

debt in respect of the payment of dues arising under any law for the time being in force, such as authorities to whom statutory dues are owed" 67. As such, with respect to the proceedings, which arise after 16.8.2019, there will be no difficulty. After the amendment, any debt

ACIT, Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bata India Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed and the CO is dismissed

ITA 1844/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata in ITA No. 1844/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2009-10;

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43B

aggregating to Rs.4,51,22,468, comprising of Rs.3,64,08,709 and Rs. 87,13,762, being the opening liabilities on account of statutory dues, which were unpaid and hence disallowed in the earlier years and were reversed by way of credit to the profit and loss account

Shubham Trading Company, Nizamabad vs. ITO., Ward 1, Nizamabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 840/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G. Saratha, SR-DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 43B

statutory records. The Ld. AR submitted that the order of the Commercial Tax Department is dated 31.05.2013 and reflects the actual statutory dues of the assessee. In support of their contentions, the assessee relied upon the following decisions of this Tribunal : i) ITA Nos.801 & 802/Hyd/2024 dated 04.12.2024 (Devi Agro Industries

Sula Vineyards Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 5(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2082/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Sula Vineyards Limited 2.4 It is submitted that, as soon as the assessee came to know that the payment failed, the said statutory dues were subsequently discharged through another bank i.e. HDFC. The assessee also placed copy of the letter from State Bank of India confirming that the payment failed ... State Bank of India but due to the technical issues at the banks end, the payment could not be processed and therefore, the said statutory dues were subsequently discharged through another bank i.e. HDFC. The assessee has also submitted a copy of the letter from State Bank of India.” Aggrieved

Tirlok Chand Sharma, F-133, Ist Floor, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 61(1), Civic Centre, Delhi, New Delhi

ITA 6136/DEL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: the appeal is finally heard or disposed of.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 43B

income. It further appears that the auditor in its tax report for the year under consideration has wrongly reported unpaid liability of the statutory dues under Section 43B of the Act in the tax audit report. Furthermore, when the same has not been routed through the profit and loss account

Sjs Motors, Meerut vs. Circle 1(1), Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5025/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshsjs Motors, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 58, Opp Dewan Circle-1(1), Meerut Textile, Delhi Road, Meerut (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abbfs1262L Assessee By : Shri Rohit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/07/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 37

Assessee submitted that the said interest payment would be compensatory in nature as it was incurred only for delayed remittance of statutory dues to the account of the Central Government. However, the plea of the Assessee was not appreciated by the learned CITA which makes the Assessee aggrieved to come

Naveen Garg, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-34(1), Delhi

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 32 days in filing appeal and appeal of appellant/assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1364/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2022-23 Naveen Garg, Vs. Ito, Ward 34(1), Hd-56, M/S.Shree Bankey Delhi Bihari Pulses Pulses Mills, 2Nd Floor, Pitampura, New Delhi Pin: 1100 34 Pan No. Agdpk1562G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Manshi Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

filing appeal on account of mishandling of proceedings by a distant relative CA Shri Aman Goel, who was hired for issuance of Nil Statutory Dues Certificate that he logged into the Income Tax Portal and got to know that the demand was standing in the name of assessee. The matter

Planex Projects and Constructions Private Limited, Ernakulam vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 844/COCH/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Jun 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2019-20 Planex Projects & Constructions Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant No. Xxv/4, Kerala State Houseing Building Changampuzha Nagar,South Kalamassery 682 [Pan: Aagcp3634A] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward-1(1) & Tps, Kozhikode Appellant By: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Surat [Cit(A)] Dated 10.07.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Execution Of Civil Contracts. The Return Of Income For Ay 2019-20 Was Filed On 30.10.2019 Declaring Nil Income. The Same Was Revised On 06.06.2020 At Nil Income. The 2 Planex Projects & Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Said Return Of Income Was Processed By The Cpc U/S. 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Vide Intimation Dated 22.09.2020 After Making Adjustment Of Unpaid Gst Of Rs. 67,54,054/-.

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 43B

well as Tax Audit Report. It is the contention of the appellant that the appellant is following the method of accounting whereby the statutory dues collected from the customers are shown as liability in the Balance Sheet without charging to the Profit & Loss A/c. and, therefore, the question of disallowance ... does not arise. It is further submitted that the statutory dues were paid on or before the due date for filing the return of income. We do not agree with the submission. Even the statutory dues collected during the course of business forms part of trading receipts which is liable

Ramchandra Dagdu Nikam, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Satara

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

ITA 2552/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vishal Makawane
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

paid electronically and makes online payment on behalf of his customers which requires his customers to deposit the necessary amounts for payment of statutory dues in the assessee’s current account with Bank of India. For AY 2017-18, the assessee filed his e- return of income on 23.03.2018 declaring

DCIT 2 2 1, Mumbai vs. M S Luvish Infotech Projects Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue bearing ITA

ITA 815/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjeedcit (2)(2)(1), Mumbai Vs M/S Luvish Infotech Projects 5Th Room No.545, Floor, Private Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Cts 102/2, Sani Armaa, Raut Lane, Mumbai-400 020 Juhu, Vile Parle West, Mumbai-400 049 Pan : Aadcm4966H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Shobhit Mishra & Mr. Mahaveer JainFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri SR.AR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 250Section 72

case of Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. vs. CIT (1980 (4) TMI 1 - SUPREME Court) wherein it was held that interest for delayed payment of statutory dues is an allowable deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act and it cannot be held as penalty paid for infringement of law. Based