“employees contribution to PF”

DisallowancesSection 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)638 judgments

The decision most relied on for employees contribution to PF is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on employees contribution to PF

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. Alom Extrusions Ltd.

319 ITR 306 · 2009 · Supreme Court

1,344

citing judgments

A proviso inserted into a section to remedy unintended consequences, make the section workable, or supply an obvious omission must be read retrospectively in operation to give effect to the section as a whole.

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.

(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. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.

368 ITR 749 · 2014 · High Court

609

citing judgments

Deduction for employees' contributions to PF and ESIC is allowable under Section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return under Section 139(1); similarly, delayed deposits of employers' contributions to ESIC and PF are also allowable.

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn

41 Taxmann.com 100 · 2014 · High Court

540

citing judgments

Employees' contributions to provident fund or other welfare funds are deductible under section 36(1)(va) only if paid by the due date specified in the respective welfare fund enactments, and section 43B does not extend this period to the income tax return filing due date under section 139(1).

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.

Judgments citing employees contribution to PF

Narender Singh, Haryana vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Gurugram

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 136/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 36(1)(va)

while processing the return of income filed by the assessee for the impugned assessment year, the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) noticed that employees’ contributions to PF and ESI were not paid within the due date as provided under Explanation -1 to section 36(1)(va) of the Income ... facts are, while processing the return of income filed for the assessment year under dispute, the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC), having noticed that employees contribution to PF and ESI was not paid within the due date prescribed under the relevant Acts, disallowed the deduction claimed on account of such payment

Shashank Tiwari, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3098/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Rohtagi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

disputed issue is no more res integra, as the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly and categorically held that in case employees contribution to PF and ESI have not been deposited within the due date prescribed under the PF and ESI Acts, the same cannot be allowed as deduction ... provisions contained under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Hon'ble Supreme Court has further held that in such circumstances, the employees contribution to PF and ESI not deposited within the due date, shall be treated as income of the assessee

Modern Insulators Limited, Abu Road vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income -Tax Circle 6 Jaipur, Jaipur

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

ITA 713/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sandep Gosain & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. Madhukar Garg CA and Sh. Anirudh Garg CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik, CIT

illegal & unjustified. 5 That the learned CIT-IA' has erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 22,81,168/- towards late deposit of employees contribution to PF. The said action is illegal and unjustified. 3. Apropos ground no. the appellant challenged the order of the Ld. CIT (A) that the learned

M/S. Grt Jewellers India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, . Central Circle-3(3), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly

ITA 113/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 113/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

making various additions, including downward adjustment proposed by the TPO towards Specified Domestic Transactions, additions towards disallowance of belated payment of employees contribution to PF & ESI u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act, addition of gross profit on alleged unaccounted sales of gold jewellery, addition of gross profit on alleged ... Kumar, CIT, on the other hand supporting the order of the ld. DRP submitted that, the controversy around deduction towards belated payment of employees contribution to PF & ESI has been finally resolved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services

Agarwal Industries Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 812/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR) and Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 37Section 37(1)

Learned Commissioner should have seen that the average cost of borrowing of the appellant company was ranging around 5.04%. Disallowance of Employees Contribution to PF Rs. 3,74,400 5. The Ld. Commissioner erred in not considering the ground relating to disallowance of Employees contribution to PF. The said amount ... have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that an amount of Rs. 3,74,440/- being employees’ contribution to PF and has not been deposited on or before the due dates provided under the respective Acts but has been deposited before

Industrial Security and Management Services, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle-5(1)(1), Gb Nagar, Noida

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

ITA 2716/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaindustrial Security & Vs. Acit, Management Services, Circle-5(1)(1), 655, Sector-37, Gb Gb Nagar, Noida Nagar, Noida, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabfi4657R

For Appellant: Mr. Supriya Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sandip Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

Appeal Centre (NFAC) disposed of the appeal vide order dated 31.07.2023 by addressing the issue in respect of addition made on account of employees contribution to PF and ESI, which was not at all ground before National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). 4. Aggrieved by this order, the assessee

Synergies Castings Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 95/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.95/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Synergies Castings Ltd Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaics7410H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate A. Aruna राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13/03/2024

For Appellant: Advocate A. ArunaFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR

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

order of the learned CIT (A) in sustaining the disallowance made by the CPC Bengaluru u/s 143(1) towards delayed remittance of Employees contribution to PF & ESI amounting to Rs.1,68,86,060/-. Page 1 of 4 ITA No 95 of 2024 Synergies Castings Ltd 3. Facts of the case ... added by the CPC Bengaluru in the intimation u/s 143(1) on account of late payment of employees’ contribution to PF & ESI as per the respective Acts. 4. Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee relying on various decisions submitted that they made all the payments before the due date

Synergies Castings Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 94/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.94/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Synergies Castings Ltd Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaics7410H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate A. Aruna राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13/03/2024

For Appellant: Advocate A. ArunaFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR

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

order of the learned CIT (A) in sustaining the disallowance made by the CPC Bengaluru u/s 143(1) towards delayed remittance of Employees contribution to PF & ESI amounting to Rs.1,85,76,482/-. Page 1 of 4 ITA No 94 of 2024 Synergies Castings Ltd 3. Facts of the case ... added by the CPC Bengaluru in the intimation u/s 143(1) on account of late payment of employees’ contribution to PF & ESI as per the respective Acts. 4. Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee relying on various decisions submitted that they made all the payments before the due date

Kutumbh Care Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-14(4), Delhi

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

ITA 1482/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmakutumbh Care Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, 216A, 2Nd Floor, Gautam Ward-14(4), Nagar, New Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadck0946K

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sandip Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

same.” 3. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is with regard to addition made on account of employees contribution to PF and ESI in the sum of Rs. 4,65,87,733/-. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record ... Care Pvt. Ltd High Court, we hold that the addition made in the sum of Rs. 4,65,87,733/- on account of employees contribution to PF and ESI is duly justified except in sum of Rs. 6,20,890/- which has been set aside to the file

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Pennar Industries Limited, Hyderabad

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

ITA 78/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.48/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 ) Pennar Industries Ltd Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Aabcp3074H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.78/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 ) Asstt. Cit Vs. Pennar Industries Ltd Circle 5(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcp3074H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Mohd. Afzal राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/02/2024 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Advocate Mohd. AfzalFor Respondent: : Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, DR

Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

Disallowance of personal expenses – Rs. 14,63,993 C) Interest paid on customs duty - Rs.1,83,00,000 D) Delayed payment of employees’ Contribution to PF - Rs. 72,94,624 E) Duty drawback on export - Rs. 2,74,437 3. In appeal, the learned CIT (A) NFAC granted part relief ... erred in disallowing an amount of Rs.72,94,624/- which was paid during the financial year relevant to the subject A.Y towards employees contribution to PF. 5) The appellant craves leave to add to, amend or modify the above grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing

Pennar Industries Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 48/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Advocate Mohd. AfzalFor Respondent: : Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, DR

Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

Grid Controller of India (Formerly Known As Power System Operation Corporation Ltd), Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-19(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2326/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Sh. Anubhav Sharmagrid Controller Of India Vs. Dcit (Formerly Known As Power System Circle-19(1), Operation Corporation Ltd) Delhi. B-9, 1St Floor, Qutab Institutional Area, Katwaria Sarai, Hauz Khas, South Delhi, New Delhi Pan No. Aafcp2086B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 50

section 36(1)(va) of the Act. (ii) That the above said disallowance has been confirmed ignoring the settled position in law that employees contribution to PF and ESI would qualify for deduction if the same is paid before due date of filling of return of income, even

Kamarhatty Company Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-1(1), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1089/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

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

course of appellate proceedings. 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the details of employer and employees contribution towards PF & ESI appearing in the audit report contains apparent mistakes with regard to date of payment and also at some places employer contribution has been mentioned ... Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kamarhatty Company Ltd. afresh after considering the details which will be filed along with proof of payment of the employees contribution towards PF & ESI. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. D.R vehemently argued supporting the order of lower authorities. 5. We have heard the rival

ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi vs. Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3170/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usansal Properties & Vs. Acit, Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Circle-2(2), 115, Ansal Bhawan, New Delhi 16, Kg Marg, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaca0006D Acit, Vs. Ansal Properties & Circle-2(2), Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 115, Ansal Bhawan, 16, Kg Marg, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaca0006D Assessee By : Shri R S. Singhvi, Adv Shri Satyajeet Goel, Adv Revenue By: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 18/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31/01/2024

For Appellant: Shri R S. Singhvi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer

Section 22Section 36(1)(va)Section 43C

Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,13,52,716/- made by the AO on account of payment of Employees' Contribution to PF and ESI deposited beyond the due date u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T. Act. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances ... Ground No.2 raised by the revenue is challenging the deletion of disallowance by the ld. CIT(A) on account of Employees contribution to PF and ESI. 12.1. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The ld. AR fairly stated that the issue in dispute

Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2549/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri R S. Singhvi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer

Section 22Section 36(1)(va)Section 43C

Kaarya Facilities and Services Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-12(3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2309/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shouvik Kumar RoyFor Respondent: 14.12.2023

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

issue involved in all these appeals are the disallowance made u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act pertaining to the delayed payment of employees contribution to PF (A.Ys.2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Kaarya Facilities and Services Limited vs. ITO & ESIC paid after the due date under the relevant

Kaarya Facilities and Services Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-12(3(1), Mum

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2308/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shouvik Kumar RoyFor Respondent: 14.12.2023

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

Kaarya Facilities and Services Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-12(3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2307/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shouvik Kumar RoyFor Respondent: 14.12.2023

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

Dexter Consultancy Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(4) Now Ward-1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 515/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 244ASection 250Section 56(2)(viib)

ITA No.515/Ahd/2023 A.Y: 2013-14 Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE

Jiwanram Sheoduttrai Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Range - 8, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 741/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 40Section 43B

Disallowance of expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct tax of Rs. 6,65,523/-. iv. Deposit of employees contribution to PF & ESI beyond due date of Rs. 4,52,535/-. v. Disallowance of leave encashment not paid within specified date of Rs. 4,12,988/-. vi. Disallowance ... sustained the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 12. Ground no. 4 is in relation with on account of employees contribution of PF & ESI beyond due date as prescribed under the Act. Accordingly, the ld. AO while framing the assessment, the ld. AO added an amount