← All Phrases

“Section 2(24)(x)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)1,421 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 2(24)(x) is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 2(24)(x)

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. 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 Section 2(24)(x)

Satendra Shrivastav, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. ITO, Ward 5(3)(3), G B Nagar

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

ITA 533/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234FSection 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.533/DEL/2023 (Assessment

Satendra Shrivastav, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. ITO, Ward 5(3)(3), G B Nagar

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

ITA 532/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234FSection 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.533/DEL/2023 (Assessment

Kairali Exports, Kilimanoor vs. ACIT Circle 1(2), Trivandrum

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 130/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Anil Kumar Dugar, Jm

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

crucial. The former forms part of the employers’ income, and the later retains its character as an income (albeit deemed), by virtue of Section 2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee

Thermax Babcock & Wilcox Energy Solution Limited, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/CIT/Asstt/ITO/NFAC, Delhi

ITA 739/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountαντ Μεμβer

For Appellant: Dhanesh Bafna a/wFor Respondent: Anil Sant

Learned AO/DRP have erred in 9.1 9.2 Prayer Disallowing an amount of INR 9,72,450 under section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Act towards employees provident fund and ESIC contribution which was deposited before the due date of filing of return of income

Superwell Services Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 22(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 298/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

dates under the relevant provisions of the Act. The Assessing Officer ruled that by virtue of Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act, such sums received by the appellants constituted "income". It was held that those amounts could not have been allowed

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)

आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,‘सी’"यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ीवीदुगा"राव,"याियकसद"यएवं"ी मंजुनाथा.जी

Express Publications (Madurai)Private Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-II(1), Chennai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 754/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.730/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.737/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.754/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Express Publications (Madurai) Dcit P. Ltd. Corporate Circle-Ii(1) बनाम/ C/O. Sri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate Chennai. Vs. 384 (Old No.196) Lloyds Road, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-0842-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1219/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit M/S. Express Publications (Madurai) P. Corporate Circle-Ii(1) Ltd. बनाम/ Vs. Chennai C/O. Sri T.N.Seetharaman, Advocate 384 (Old No.196) Lloyds Road, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-0842-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T.N. Seetharaman (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-03-2024

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Seetharaman (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ चे"ईम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा

Express Publications (Madurai)Private Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-II(1), Chennai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 737/CHNY/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.730/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.737/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.754/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Express Publications (Madurai) Dcit P. Ltd. Corporate Circle-Ii(1) बनाम/ C/O. Sri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate Chennai. Vs. 384 (Old No.196) Lloyds Road, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-0842-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1219/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit M/S. Express Publications (Madurai) P. Corporate Circle-Ii(1) Ltd. बनाम/ Vs. Chennai C/O. Sri T.N.Seetharaman, Advocate 384 (Old No.196) Lloyds Road, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-0842-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T.N. Seetharaman (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-03-2024

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Seetharaman (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ चे"ईम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा

Express Publications (Madurai)Private Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-II(1), Chennai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 730/CHNY/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.730/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.737/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.754/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Express Publications (Madurai) Dcit P. Ltd. Corporate Circle-Ii(1) बनाम/ C/O. Sri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate Chennai. Vs. 384 (Old No.196) Lloyds Road, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-0842-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1219/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit M/S. Express Publications (Madurai) P. Corporate Circle-Ii(1) Ltd. बनाम/ Vs. Chennai C/O. Sri T.N.Seetharaman, Advocate 384 (Old No.196) Lloyds Road, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-0842-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T.N. Seetharaman (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-03-2024

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Seetharaman (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ चे"ईम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. Express Publications(Madurai) Private Limited, Chennai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1219/CHNY/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.730/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.737/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.754/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Express Publications (Madurai) Dcit P. Ltd. Corporate Circle-Ii(1) बनाम/ C/O. Sri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate Chennai. Vs. 384 (Old No.196) Lloyds Road, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-0842-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1219/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit M/S. Express Publications (Madurai) P. Corporate Circle-Ii(1) Ltd. बनाम/ Vs. Chennai C/O. Sri T.N.Seetharaman, Advocate 384 (Old No.196) Lloyds Road, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-0842-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T.N. Seetharaman (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-03-2024

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Seetharaman (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ चे"ईम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा

M/S. Bulk Liquid Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Rajagopal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 30Section 32Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

credited by the assessee to the employee’s account in the relevant fund or funds on or before the due date”. iii. Section 2(24)(x) refers to only employee welfare fund contributions and does not refer to Profession Tax as under: “any sum received by the assessee from

Indica Industries P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 12(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2565/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshindica Industries Pvt. Ltd, Vs. National Faceless A-4, Greater Kailash, Appeal Centre, South Delhi, Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaaaci0233Q

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: None
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

crucial. The former forms part of the employers’ income, and the later retains its character as an income (albeit deemed), by virtue of Section 2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee

M/S. Rajshree Polypack Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 915/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI BR BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM

M/S. Rajshree Polypack Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst Dir of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 914/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI BR BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM

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

ITA No 95 of 2024 Synergies Castings Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

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

ITA No 94 of 2024 Synergies Castings Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

Ayur Green Ayurveda Hospitals Private Limited, Malappuram vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 565/COCH/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Mar 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmiayurgreen Ayurveda Hospsitals Vs Dcit, Private Limited Cpc, Door No. 1/301 Ayurgreen Bengaluru. Ayurveda Hospitals, Kaladi Mlp Edappal, Malappuram-679585. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaica 4294 M

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2Section 30Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

lapse from part of the assessee warranting to the addition by invoicing the provisions of section 36(1)(va) and section 2(24(x). 6. This issue was raised in a prominent newspapers at that time. The said newspaper cuttings has been attached herewith for your kind perusal and records ... According to this section any sum received by the assessee from any of his employees to which the provisions of section 2(24)(x) will be allowed as deduction, if such sum is credited by the assessee to the employee's account in the relevant fund or funds

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

crucial. The former forms part of the employers’ income, and the later retains its character as an income (albeit deemed), by virtue of Section 2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee

Carmel Convent, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ITO Exemption Ward, Trivandram, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes, and it’s stay petition is dismissed

ITA 689/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Mar 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. Seethalakshmi

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Dr. Seethalakshmi, Judicial Member

Kalipada Saha, Hooghly vs. ITO, Ward 24(3), Hooghly

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1447/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg&Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 2Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

separately dealt with in different clauses of Section 36 (1). All these establish that Parliament, while introducing Section 36(1)(va) along with Section 2(24)(x), was aware of the distinction between the two types of contributions. There was a statutory classification, under the IT Act, between ... income tax, the deduction was available. A reading of the judgment in Alom Extrusions, would reveal that this court, did not consider Sections 2(24)(x) and 36(1)(va). Furthermore, the separate provisions in Section 36(1) for employers' contribution and employees' contribution, too went unnoticed. • When Parliament introduced