“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

Suresh & Co., Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 538/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Poornima S, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R

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

Bangalore Page 2 of 6 Act, wherein disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF & ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Act. The relevant details are tabulated below:- Parti- Month ... Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (supra)¸ 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

Haradanahally Chennappa Reddy Arunamma, Tumkur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 683/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, CA

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

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 of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act and in view of the judgment ... Tribunal reads as follows:- "7. I have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has not remitted the employees' contribution of PF of Rs.1,06,190 and ESI of Rs.16,055 totaling to Rs.1,22,245 before the due date specified under the respective

Sri. Shamanna Nagamma Balasubramany, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 682/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sri.Ramasubramaniyan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

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

income determined u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act was on account of disallowance of Rs.93,86,400 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 3 Sri Shamanna Nagamma Balasubramany. section 43B of the Act. In this context, the assessee

M/S. Hi Q Design and Detailing Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 675/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Ms.Akshaya K.S., CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

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

account of disallowance of Rs.9,14,808 (for A.Y.2018-2019) and Rs.12,05,034 (for A.Y. 2019-2020) 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 appeals before the 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. Hi Q Design and Detailing Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 674/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Ms.Akshaya K.S., CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

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

Technocon Constructions & Infrastructure Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1) Represented by Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 670/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sri.Rajgopal, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 3Section 30Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

income determined u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act was on account of disallowance of Rs.4,33,873 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. Methods (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bengaluru

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

ITA 558/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sri.Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Gopinath C.H., CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 438Section 43B

assessed loss u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act was on account of disallowance of sum of Rs.19,35,406 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

Sri. P Anand Vardhan Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 664/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sri.S.Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 250Section 36Section 43B

assessed income u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act was on account of disallowance of sum of Rs.12,37,610 being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. The assessee filed a rectification application u/s 154 of the I.T.Act to CPC. The CPC rejected ... rejecting the rectification application, the assessee preferred an appeal before the 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

Sri. P Anand Vardhan Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 663/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sri.S.Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43E

income determined u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act was on account of disallowance of Rs.64,13,660 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

Sri. P Anand Vardhan Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 662/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sri.S.Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 250Section 36Section 43B

assessed income u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act was on account of disallowance of sum of Rs.64,13,660 being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. The assessee filed a rectification application u/s 154 of the I.T.Act to CPC. The CPC rejected ... rejecting the rectification application, the assessee preferred an appeal before the 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

Venkara Reddy Pramod Reddy, Tumkuru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 659/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sri.Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Gopinath C.H., CIT-DR

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

income determined u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act was on account of disallowance of Rs.7,65,661 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. Shabari Enterprises, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 482/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Ashwin D.Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

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

prejudicial to the appellant. 2. The ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the order passed by the ld.AO and disallowing the delayed deposits of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI funds, by relying on the 2 ITA No.481-482/Bang/2021. M/s.Shabari Enterprises. explanations inserted to section ... Finance Act, 2021, which are prospective in nature. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the ld.AO erred in disallowing the delayed deposits of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI funds, disregarding the binding jurisdictional order of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the appellant’s own case

M/S. Shabari Enterprises, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 481/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Ashwin D.Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

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

Bi Worldwide India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 433/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri C.R Krishna, CA

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

Income-tax Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act, the CPC made an adjustment of the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs.9,45,931/- on the ground that the assessee did not remit the employees' contribution to PF and ESI within ... Ld.AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). 5. 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 of the return u/s 139(1) of the Act and in view of the judgment

Genworks Health Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 469/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri K.R Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT (DR)

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 6

Learned Assessing Officer ["AO"]/ Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) {"CIT(A)"] has erred in disallowing the delayed remittance of the employees contribution to PF and ESI without appreciating that the Appellant had remitted the same before the due date for filing of return of income under section ... filing return of income, the same cannot be disallowed. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that delay in deposit of employees contribution to PF and ESI will not be allowed based on the amendment bought in by the Finance Act, 2021, without appreciating the fact that

Active Group Securitas, New Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1287/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

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

explanations use the phrase "shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied". This indicates that in respect of employees' contribution to PF & ESI, the provisions of sec 43B shall deemed to have never applied. • The present amendment to see 43B through insertion of Explanation ... corresponding explanatory notes to finance act 2021, only seek to reinforce and reiterate the original intention of the legislature in 1983. • Admittedly, the employees' contribution to PF & ESI are included in the definition of income u/s 2(24)(x) and form income of the appellant. Whenever the appellant pays this

Active Group Securitas, New Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1286/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

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

Excel Phosphates Private Limited, Meerut vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1258/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Excel Phosphates Pvt.Ltd., Vs Adit, 195-196, Shatabdi Nagar, Delhi Cpc, Road, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh-250103 Bengaluru. Pan-Aacce3927B Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 30.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 30.12.2021

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

while processing the return of income, the Assessing Officer disallowed a sum of Rs.2,84,286/- being delayed payment of employees contribution to PF and ESI within due dates and intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act was passed on 06.07.2020. 4. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before

M/S. Vijay Samraj Hotels Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 504/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Vijay Samraj Hotels P. The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner Of No. 18, 3Rd Main Road, Income Tax, Gandhinagar, Cpc, Bangalore – 560 009. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aabcv4731B Appellant Respondent Shri S.V. Ravishankar, Assessee By : Advocate & Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Ca : Shri Raghavendra Rao, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 01-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-12-2021 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.07.2021 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Impugned Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Bengaluru Karnataka Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case.

For Appellant: Advocate & Ms. Sunaina

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 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. 6,10,738/-. 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. 3.1 Aggrieved by the order of Ld.AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). 4. Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee remitted the employees contribution to PF

Mr. Yeruva Prasad, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 589/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Kusuma Yatish, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

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

account of disallowance of Rs.93,38,791 (for A.Y.2018-2019) and Rs.1,04,33,007 (for A.Y. 2019-2020) being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. 4. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeals 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