“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

Bellur Hiriyaniah Sridhar Murthy, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 543/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: None

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 30Section 32Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 41Section 43B

544/Bang/2022 were processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the CPC disallowed the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs.1,76,700/- and Rs.7,53,367/-. The reason for making the disallowance was that the assessee ... remit the employees' contribution to PF and ESI within the due date specified under the respective Acts. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee remitted the employees contribution to PF and ESI before the due date

Datacorp Traffic Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 532/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R

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

wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 4. The assessee challenged the above said addition by filing appeal ... Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT ((2014)(43 taxmann.com 33)(Kar) had held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI provided that the payments were made prior to the due date of filing of the return of income

Teamlease Services Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 530/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Teamlease Services Ltd., The Assistant 6Th Floor, Bmtc Director Of Commercial Complex, Income Tax, 80 Feet Road, Cpc, Koramangala, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 095. Pan: Aabct5458K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None : Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 02-08-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02-08-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 27/09/2021 U/S. 250 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19 On Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: None

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

return was processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the CPC disallowed the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs.43,24,284/-. The reason for making the disallowance was that the assessee did not remit ... employees' contribution to PF and ESI within the due date specified under the respective Acts. Page 3 of 6 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee remitted the employees contribution to PF and ESI before

Shahi Electricals, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 528/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sri.Sairam, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

assessed income u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act was on account of disallowance of sum of Rs.1,14,685 being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before ... first appellate authority. It was stated that the assessee had paid the employees’ contribution to PF and ESI prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Therefore, it was submitted that the assessee is entitled to deduction of employees’ contribution to PF

Expat Engineering India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 503/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Rajgopal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 43B

Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] made by the AO and upheld by the CIT(Appeals). 5. The ld. AR submitted that the employees contribution of PF and ESI was paid before the due date of filing of return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Income

M/S Paper Recycle, Mumbai vs. CIT (Appeal), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 694/MUM/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is not in dispute that assessee had remitted the employees’ contribution of PF & ESI with much before the due date of filing of return u/s.139(1) of the Act, though the same has been remitted belatedly beyond ... Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd., reported in 368 ITR 749 had held that employees contribution to PF & ESI if remitted within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act for filing the income tax returns, would be allowed as deduction u/s.43B

Mafatlal Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4369/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S

Mafatlal Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6963/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S

Mafatlal Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6085/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S

M/S. L K Trust, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 409/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Suresh Rao, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 143(1)

assessed income u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act was on account of disallowance of sum of Rs.2,40,860 being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. 7. Aggrieved by the intimation u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before ... first appellate authority. It was stated that the assessee had paid the employees’ contribution to PF and ESI prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Therefore, it was submitted that the assessee is entitled to deduction of employees’ contribution to PF

M/S. Canadian International School Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 519/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Advocate

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESEIDENT AND SHRI PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT

M/S. Goodwill Enterprises, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 497/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

For Respondent: Shri Joseph Varghese

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

return was processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the CPC disallowed the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs. 3,28,741/-. The reason for making the disallowance was that the assessee did not remit ... employees' contribution to PF and ESI within the due date specified under the respective Acts. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee remitted the employees contribution to PF and ESI before the due date of Page

Lmg Consulting Services India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Splash Fashions India Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 449/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Lmg Consulting Services India Pvt. Ltd., [Formerly Known As Splash Fashions India The Assistant Pvt. Ltd.], Director Of 4Th Floor, Building No. 3, Income Tax, 77 Town Centre, Cpc, Off Hal Airport Road, Vs. Bangalore. Yemlur, Bangalore – 560 037. Pan: Aarcs5369N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Rashmi R, Advocate : Shri Venudhar Godesi, Jcit Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 21-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-07-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 31/03/2022 U/S. 250 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Disallowance Towards Delayed Remittance Of Employees' Contribution To Provident Fund ["Pf"] Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Act

For Appellant: Smt. Rashmi R, Advocate

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B

return was processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the CPC disallowed the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs. 1,82,71,881/-. The reason for making the disallowance was that the assessee ... remit the employees' contribution to PF and ESI within the due date specified under the respective Acts. Page 4 of 7 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee remitted the employees contribution to PF

Datacorp Traffic Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 502/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Ms.Veena V.H., CAFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., , Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

income at Rs.13,14,06,170 wherein the Assessing Officer, inter alia, disallowed an amount of Rs.56,74,806 being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. 4. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority. It was contended that assessee has paid ... date of filing of return under section 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, it was submitted assessee is entitled to deduction of the employees’ contribution of PF and ESI having regard to the provision to section 43B of the Act. In this context, the assessee relied on the judgment

Datacorp Traffic Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 501/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Ms.Veena V.H., CAFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., , Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

income at Rs.6,25,53,510, wherein the Assessing Officer, inter alia, disallowed an amount of Rs.60,08,622 being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. 4. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority. It was contended that assessee has paid ... date of filing of return under section 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, it was submitted assessee is entitled to deduction of the employees’ contribution of PF and ESI having regard to the provision to section 43B of the Act. In this context, the assessee relied on the judgment

M/S. Khoday India Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 408/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)

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

Bangalore for the assessment year 2018-19 & 2019-20 respectively. 2. The common issue involved in these appeals is the disallowance of the employees contribution to PF and ESI on the ground that the ITA Nos.407 & 408/Bang/2022 Page 2 of 8 payments were made beyond the due date prescribed under ... that relevant statute. 3. The ld. AR submitted that the employee contribution of PF & ESI was paid before the due date of filing of return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] and was thus allowable u/s 43B of the Act. The Bangalore Tribunal

M/S. Khoday India Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 407/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)

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

Lsi India Research & Development Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 357/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Ms. Mahim Goud, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)

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

Singapore) Pte Ltd. engaged in the business of rendering software development services to its Associated Enterprises. 4. The ld. AR submitted that the employee contribution of PF was paid before the due date of filing of return of income u/s .139(1) of the Income

Wm Global Sourcing India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 450/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Smt. Rashmi R, Advocate

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

return was processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the CPC disallowed the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs. 17,19,580/-. The reason for making the disallowance was that the assessee did not remit ... employees' contribution to PF and ESI within the due date specified under the respective Acts. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee remitted the employees contribution to PF and ESI before the due date of filing

Sri Chamundeswari Sugars Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 356/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja Maru, CA

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

were processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act, the CPC disallowed the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs.64,52,229/- for A.Y. 2018-19 and Rs.89,95,797/- for A.Y. 2019- 20. The reason ... making the disallowance was that the assessee did not remit the employees' contribution to PF and ESI within the due date specified under the respective Acts. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee remitted the employees contribution