“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)

Ramacivil India Construction, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle, 19(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2162/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Department by: Ms. Beenu, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Beenu, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

approach indicated in the ruling in Alom Extrusions. As noticed previously, Alom Extrutions did not consider the fact of the introduction of Section 2(24)(x) or in fact the other provisions of the Act. 52. When Parliament introduced Section 43B, what was on the statute book, was only employer ... long periods. That Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by way of deduction authorized by the statute

Rishabh Metals and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. CPC, DCIT -Cir 1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assesses is partly allowed

ITA 775/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blerishabh Metals & Chemicals V. Dcit-Circle -1(3)(1) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 4Th Floor, Eross Theatre Bldg Mumbai - 400020 Jt Road, Churchgate Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacr2214E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : None Department Represented By : Shri P.D. Chougule

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)

long periods. That Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by way of deduction authorized by the statute ... 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

Sharekhan Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy Comm of Income Tax, CPC, Mumbai

ITA 182/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Om Prakash Kantassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Mundra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Milind S. Chavan, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 40A(7)Section 43B

Sterling Motors, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 17(3), Mumbai

ITA 1/MUM/2022[2018-196]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-196

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rayan Saldhana, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Hiren M. Bhatt, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

ESIC contribution & 3 M/s. Sterling Motors superannuation fund etc. after due date prescribed under the Act under section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Act but certainly before the due date of filing the return. 6. The Ld. A.R. for the assessee company challenging ... approach indicated in the ruling in Alom Extrusions. As noticed previously, Alom Extrutions did not consider the fact of the introduction of Section 2(24)(x) or in fact the other provisions of the Act. 52. When Parliament introduced Section 43B, what was on the statute book, was only employer

Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1785/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Shreekala Pardeshi, Sr.DR

Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

long periods. That Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by way of deduction authorized by the statute ... 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

Dinesh Industrial Corporation, Gautam Buddha Nagar vs. ITO, Ward-5(1)(1), Gautam Buddha Nagar

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

ITA 45/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramanand Roy, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR

Bimla Thakur, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 43(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2963/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediai.T.A. No.2963/Del/2022 Assessment Year 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri P.P. Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR

Certitude, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-30(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 99/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR

Gopi Mani Kuttan, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 92/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Atul Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR

Dhanya Promoters Private Limited, Delhi vs. Central Circle-13, Delhi

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

ITA 258/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 43

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

Force Tech Security (India) P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-7, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2143/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND M.BALAGANESH

ACIT, Circle- 27(1), New Delhi vs. U K Paints India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Revenue for A

ITA 764/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaacit Vs. M/S. U. K. Paints (India) Pvt. Central Circle – 10 Ltd., 19, Dda Commercial New Delhi Complex, Kailash Colony Extn., Zamrudpur, New Delhi - 48 Pan No. Aaacu 0057 C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Co No. 244/Del/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4115/Del/2013) (For Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S. U. K. Paints (India) Vs. Acit Pvt. Ltd., 19, Dda Central Circle – 10 Commercial Complex, New Delhi Kailash Colony Extn., Zamrudpur, New Delhi-48 Pan No. Aaacu 0057 C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Acit Vs. U. K. Paints (India) Pvt. Ltd. Circle – 27(1) 19, Dda Commercial New Delhi Complex, Kailash Colony Extn., Zamrudpur, New Delhi-48 Pan No. Aaacu 0057 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S U.K. Paints (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Revenue for A

ITA 4115/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV

Transcon Freight System Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CPC, Bangalore

In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed, while the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 85/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati

Section 2(24)Section 254(2)Section 36(1)(va)

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

Sharda Silicate & Chemical Industries, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 26(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed, while the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 211/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati

Section 2(24)Section 254(1)Section 254(2)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S. Makhija Electromechanical Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed, while the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1635/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati

Section 2(24)Section 254(2)Section 36(1)(va)

Reuters India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD) RG 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed, while ground no

ITA 9045/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati

Section 2(24)Section 254(2)Section 36(1)(va)

Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Co. Ltd., Raipur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 24/RPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur15 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.16/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Ltd. O/O. Executive Director-Finance Ground Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5772F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.24/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Ltd. Ground Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5772F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32

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 ... proviso, and observed as follows: “10. “Income” has been defined under Section 2(24) of the Act to include profits and gains. Under Section 2(24)(x), any sum received by the assessee from his 32 Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Ltd. ITA No.24/RPR/2022 employees as contributions to any provident

The Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Limited, Raipur, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax 1(2), Raipur, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 16/BIL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur15 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32

Dr Deshmukh Mother and Child Care, Ujjain vs. PCIT-1, Indore

ITA 101/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Dr. Deshmukh Mother & Pr. Cit-I, Child Care, Indore बनाम/ 27, Nirman Nagar, Vs. Ujjain (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aahfd3407H Assessee By Ms. Ruchira Negi, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.06.2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,इंदौर"ायपीठ,इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA R KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER