← All Phrases

“Section 36(1)(iv)”

Section References (mined)Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)513 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 36(1)(iv) is Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT v. GTN Textiles Ltd. (269 ITR 285), cited in 176 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 36(1)(iv)

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.

CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.
404 ITR 1 · 2018 · Supreme Court
164
citing judgments

The waiver of a loan taken for acquiring capital assets is considered a capital receipt and is not taxable as income under Section 28(iv) of the Income Tax Act. The ruling distinguishes between the waiver of trading liabilities and capital liabilities for tax purposes.

411/225 Taxman 6 (Mag.) (Raj.) and CIT v. Jaipur Vidhut Vitaran Nigam Ltd.
363 ITR 307 · 2014 · High Court
115
citing judgments

Employees' contribution to provident fund (PF) and Employees' State Insurance (ESI) deposited by the employer on or before the due date of furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1) cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) or Section 43B of the Income Tax Act.

CIT v. Rao Bahadur Calavala Cunnan Chetty Charities
135 ITR 485 · 1982 · High Court
98
citing judgments

The income of a charitable trust, particularly income from property held under trust, for the purpose of claiming exemption under Section 11, must be computed in a normal commercial manner, without strict reference to the computation provisions for different heads of income like Section 14 or Section 24(a). This approach ensures that the income available for application or accumulation is assessed on commercial principles.

Solid Containers Ltd. v. DCIT
308 ITR 417 · 2009 · High Court
74
citing judgments

The write-back or waiver of a loan obtained for business purposes constitutes taxable business income under Section 28. This applies even if no prior deduction was claimed, thereby not attracting Section 41(1).

Madras Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT
91 Taxmann 340 · 1997 · Supreme Court
73
citing judgments

The Supreme Court held that discount on the issue of debentures is a deductible expenditure that can be spread proportionately over the period for which the debentures remain outstanding, rather than being claimed entirely in the year of issue. This treatment acknowledges the enduring benefit derived from the funds raised through debentures.

KeshrichandJaisukhlal v. CIT
199 ITR 702 · 1993 · High Court
62
citing judgments

Notional income, such as notional interest on interest-free loans, cannot be brought to tax without a specific statutory provision in the Income Tax Act. Only real income that has accrued or been received by the assessee is subject to income tax.

Somasundaram and Bros. v. CIT
238 ITR 939 · 1999 · High Court
53
citing judgments

Interest paid on borrowed funds is not allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act to the extent such funds are diverted to provide interest-free advances for non-business purposes, such as to sister concerns or promoter companies.

Judgments citing Section 36(1)(iv)

Emson Gears Ltd., Ludhiana vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal stand dismissed

ITA 709/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 709/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Emson Gears Ltd. Dcit, Circle I, बनाम/ Vs. D-42, Phase V, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Dhandari Kalan, Punjab. 141010 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaace-3697-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Sarabjit Garg (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Mumbai [Cit(A)] Dated 27-09-2023 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) On 03-06-2020 Disallowing Late Payment Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf / Esi In Terms Of Sec.43B R.W.S. 36(1)(Va) As Well As Sec.2(24)(X). The Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Same, Inter-Alia, By Relying Upon The Decision Of Hon’Ble Apex Court In The Case Of Checkmate Services P. Ltd Vs. Cit (2022) 143

For Appellant: Sh. Sarabjit Garg (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Court that there is clear distinction between employer’s contribution which is its primary liability under law [in terms of Section 36(1)(iv)] and its liability to deposit amounts received by it or deducted by it from its employees’ [in terms of Sec. 36(1)(va)]. The former forms

Mr. Venkataraman Swaminathan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncc-19(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2603/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2603/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 Mr.Venkataraman Swaminathan, Income Tax Officer, No.28/1, Velu Street, Non.Corporate Circle-19(1), West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai-600 033. [Pan: Aasps3855R] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri D.Anand, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)

flawed as he has confirmed the addition on wrong premise of ESI and PF being on the same putting for the purposes of section 36(1)(iv) r.w. rule 87. The Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of lower authorities. 3.0 We have heard rival submissions on the matter ... employer's contribution, if any, to any provident fund (whether recognized or not) in respect of the same employee for that year …” . Further, section 36(1)(iv) of the act provides as under:- (iv) “….any sum paid by the assessee as an employer by way of contribution towards a recognized

M/S Varsha Construction, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 5/RPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 5/Rpr/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Varsha Construction, V The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Second Floor-25, 26, Millenium Plaza, S Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Raipur-492 001, Chhattisgarh Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G.. Pan: Aaefv 8399 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2025 : 22.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

fund is to be treated as deduction (Section 36(1)(va)). The other important feature is that this distinction between the employers’ contribution (Section 36(1)(iv)) and employees’ contribution required to be deposited by the employer (Section 36(1)(va)) was maintained – and continues to be maintained ... condition for allowing the expenditure. 53. The distinction between an employer’s contribution which is its primary liability under law – in terms of Section 36(1)(iv), and its liability to deposit amounts received by it or deducted by it (Section 36(1)(va)) is, thus crucial. The former forms