← All Phrases

“Section 36(1)(va)”

Section References (mined)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)2,467 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 36(1)(va) is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 36(1)(va)

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.

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. 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).

Judgments citing Section 36(1)(va)

Kiri Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 422/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & ShriFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 201Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 37(1)

1,56,10,238/- under Section 14A, a disallowance of employee contributions to the Provident Fund amounting to Rs. 88,94,666/- under Section 36(1)(va), a disallowance of Rs. 57,74,100/- concerning commission paid to non-residents and a sum of Rs. 35,18,785/- under Section

Bhanupratap Santprasad Singh, Parbhani Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Hingoli, Parbhani, Maharashtra

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

ITA 251/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.251/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bhanupratap Santprasad Vs. Ito, Ward- Hingoli, Singh, Parbhani. Pandharkar Niwas, Dnayneshwar Nagar, Parbhani- 431401. Pan : Awgps7884J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Darshan R Gattani Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.12.2023 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru For The Assessment Year 2018-19 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.30,46,456/- Made By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) On Account Of Disallowance U/S 43B For Non-Payment Of Service Tax, Even Though Neither The Tax Amount Was Received From The Customer Nor Was The Service Tax Amount Debited To Profit & Loss Account. Therefore, The Same May Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Shri Darshan R GattaniFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY

Manisha Agri Biotech Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 501/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.491, 493, 500 & 501/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit/Acit Private Ltd. Vs. Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.45/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Vs. Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit, Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Private Ltd., Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By: None राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit,Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 23/10/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Are Filed By Manisha Agri Biotech Private Ltd., (“The Assessee”) & The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved With The Separate

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT,DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

employees’ contributions are not paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts, assessee will not be entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Hence, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court (Supra), we also hold that since the assessee

Manisha Agri Biotech Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 500/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.491, 493, 500 & 501/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit/Acit Private Ltd. Vs. Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.45/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Vs. Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit, Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Private Ltd., Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By: None राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit,Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 23/10/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Are Filed By Manisha Agri Biotech Private Ltd., (“The Assessee”) & The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved With The Separate

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT,DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

employees’ contributions are not paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts, assessee will not be entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Hence, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court (Supra), we also hold that since the assessee

Manisha Agri Biotech Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 493/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.491, 493, 500 & 501/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit/Acit Private Ltd. Vs. Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.45/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Vs. Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit, Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Private Ltd., Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By: None राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit,Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 23/10/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Are Filed By Manisha Agri Biotech Private Ltd., (“The Assessee”) & The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved With The Separate

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT,DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

employees’ contributions are not paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts, assessee will not be entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Hence, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court (Supra), we also hold that since the assessee

Manisha Agri Biotech Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 491/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.491, 493, 500 & 501/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit/Acit Private Ltd. Vs. Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.45/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Vs. Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit, Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Private Ltd., Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By: None राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit,Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 23/10/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Are Filed By Manisha Agri Biotech Private Ltd., (“The Assessee”) & The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved With The Separate

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT,DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

employees’ contributions are not paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts, assessee will not be entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Hence, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court (Supra), we also hold that since the assessee

DCIT, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Manisha Agri Biotech Private Limited, R.R.Dist

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 45/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.491, 493, 500 & 501/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit/Acit Private Ltd. Vs. Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.45/Hyd/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Vs. Manisha Agri Biotech Dcit, Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Private Ltd., Hyderabad [Pan :Aaccm7108C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By: None राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit,Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 23/10/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Are Filed By Manisha Agri Biotech Private Ltd., (“The Assessee”) & The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved With The Separate

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT,DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

employees’ contributions are not paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts, assessee will not be entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Hence, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court (Supra), we also hold that since the assessee

Aptiv Connection Systems India Private Limited, Kochi, Kerala vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Ernakulam, Kerala

ITA 749/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh

Aptiv Connection Systems India Private Limited, Kochi, Kerala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi, Kerala

ITA 736/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh

Aptiv Connection Systems India Private Limited, Kochi, Kerala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi, Ernakulam, Kerala

ITA 735/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh

Patric John, Tiruvallur vs. ACIT, Alappuzha

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 452/COCH/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhpatric John Assistant Commissioner Of Plot No. 225, F-2, 6Th Street Income Tax Modern City, Pattabiram Alappuzha Vs. Poonamallee Tiruvallur 600072 [Pan: Afapj9149Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(v)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

sole substantive ground raised in the instant appeal pleads that both the lower authorities erred in law and on facts in invoking section 36(1)(va) ESI & PF disallowance in question of Rs.21,35,115/- despite the fact that it had complied 2 Patric John with all the relevant provisions

Muraleedharan Kalathil, Cochin vs. ACIT, Kochi

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 449/COCH/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhmuraleedharan Kalathil Assistant Commissioner Of 9F Sai Sree Ram Prakash Vihar Income Tax Awho, Ernakulam Vs. Cochin Cochin 682023 [Pan: Afhpk6833P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(v)Section 250Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh

M/S.Kerala Cars P.Ltd, Cochin vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Cochin

ITA 155/COCH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

assessee’s identical sole substantive ground raised in both these appeals challenges the correctness of the learned lower authorities’ action making section 36(1)(va) PF & ESI disallowance/ addition of Rs. 42,03,934/- each on the ground that it had failed to credit the said dues regarding employees’ contribution

M/S.Kerala Cars P.Ltd, Cochin vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Cochin

ITA 154/COCH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

assessee’s identical sole substantive ground raised in both these appeals challenges the correctness of the learned lower authorities’ action making section 36(1)(va) PF & ESI disallowance/ addition of Rs. 42,03,934/- each on the ground that it had failed to credit the said dues regarding employees’ contribution

Thedcit, Cochin vs. M.S Cochin International Airport Ltd, Cochin

ITA 304/COCH/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: 22.08.2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

merit in Revenue’s instant substantive ground. 10. The Revenue’s third ground in AY 2011-12 appeal raises the issue of section 36(1)(va) disallowance on the ground that the assessee ought to have credited the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI within the specified due date under

The DCIT, Cochin vs. M.S Cochin International Airport Ltd, Cochin

ITA 193/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: 22.08.2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

merit in Revenue’s instant substantive ground. 10. The Revenue’s third ground in AY 2011-12 appeal raises the issue of section 36(1)(va) disallowance on the ground that the assessee ought to have credited the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI within the specified due date under

The DCIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Cochin International Airport Ltd, Cochin

ITA 167/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: 22.08.2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

merit in Revenue’s instant substantive ground. 10. The Revenue’s third ground in AY 2011-12 appeal raises the issue of section 36(1)(va) disallowance on the ground that the assessee ought to have credited the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI within the specified due date under

The DCIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Cochin International Airport Ltd, Cochin

ITA 166/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: 22.08.2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

merit in Revenue’s instant substantive ground. 10. The Revenue’s third ground in AY 2011-12 appeal raises the issue of section 36(1)(va) disallowance on the ground that the assessee ought to have credited the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI within the specified due date under

Heylands Exports Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1539/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: 21.08.2024
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 36(1)(va)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी

Thamanna, Mysore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income, Circle-2(1), Mysore

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

ITA 1188/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43

were not deposited within the due date prescribed under the PF and ESI Acts in terms of Explanation-1 to section 36(1)(va) of the Act. The said provision makes it clear that if employees' contribution to PF and ESI is not paid within due date provided under ... return. In that scenario, the CPC could not have made adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act. ♦ Amendment to section 36(1)(va) introducing Explanation-2, which clarifies that the provisions of section 43B shall not apply for the purpose of determining the due date