“Section 2(24)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(24)1,946 judgments

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

Leading authorities on Section 2(24)

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. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.

306 ITR 392 · 2008 · Supreme Court

577

citing judgments

The "Purpose Test" determines whether an incentive or subsidy is a capital or revenue receipt for income tax purposes. If the incentive's purpose is to enable an assessee to set up a new industry or make investments in capital assets, it is a capital receipt and not taxable.

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 2(24)

Sophos Technologies Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 466/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 92C

previous year of every person. Thus, it is the earning of the 'Income' that attracts the charge. 'Income' has been defined under Section 2(24) of the Act to include 'dividend'. Therefore, the Authority has erred in not appreciating that Section 115-0 levies additional tax on the company ... declaration, distribution or payment of dividend by company cannot in any manner be regarded as 'income of the company distributing the dividend. Even Section 2(24) has not been amended by the Legislature in as much as regarding the "amounts declared, distributed or paid by way of dividends" as "income

O.K. Auto Components Pvt Ltd, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s)

ITA 3584/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)

consequence of above-stated discussion, the prima facie disallowance of impugned contribution towards ESI and EPF under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Act of 1961 made by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(1)(a) by order dated 16.12.2021 is hereby set-aside

Gujarat Urban Development Co. Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The Dy.CIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 2158/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.2157/Ahd/2025 2. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.2158/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gujarat Urban Development The Dy.Cit, बनाम/ Co.Ltd. Gandhinagar Circle V/S. Karmayogi Bhavan It Office Block-1, Udhyog Bhavan B 1 Wing, Ground Floor Sector-11 Sector-10A Gandhinagar – 382 010 Gandhinagar – 382 010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabcg 1330 R (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) ()* यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Ukti Shah, Ars Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr & Shri Arvind R. Kumbhare Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/012026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate and Ms. Ukti Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR and Shri Arvind R. Kumbhare Sr.DR

Section 234BSection 250Section 270A

leave to the competent authority to look into. 4.5. At this stage, the Ld. DR has pointed out to the provisions of section 2(24)(xviii) to submit that w.e.f. AY 2016-17 any assistance in the form of ‘subsidy’, or grant, or cash incentive, or duty draw back ... reimbursement by the Central or State Government, hence cannot be treated as income of the assessee. Therefore, in our view, the provisions of section 2(24)(xviii) are not attracted in this case to treat the ‘advance’ shown in the books of accounts out of the IDI received in past

Gujarat Urban Development Co. Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The Dy.CIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 2157/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate and Ms. Ukti Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR and Shri Arvind R. Kumbhare Sr.DR

Section 234BSection 250Section 270A

Subhash Suryakant Phadkar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 35(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed in above terms

ITA 3490/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am Mr. Subhash Suryakant Phadkar, Income Tax Officer, B-184, Kalpataru Sparkle, Bandra East, Ward 35(3)(4), Vs. Mumbai- 400051 Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Mumbai- 400051 Pan No.Aaapp3456H (Appellant) (Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Makadia, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha P. Kaushik, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54Section 54E

hand, 6. controverted the said fact and contended that the lower authorities have rightly taxed the receipt as income from other sources as section 2(24) of the Act which defines “income” has not specifically exempted such receipts for hardship allowances to be exempted. Further, the Ld. DR extensively relied

Fujiyama Power Systems, Parwanoo vs. ITO Parwanoo, Parwanoo

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, and the penalty of Rs

ITA 977/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 68

interest of Rs. 15,300/-; (iii) Addition of Rs. 35,62,089/- on account of delayed payment of employees’ contribution to PF under section 2(24)(x) read with section 36(1)(va); (iv) Addition of Rs. 4,79,88,545/- on account of mismatch of income as per Form

Cil Employees Co Op Credit Society Limited, Pune vs. Exemption, Ward-1(2), Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1600/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1600/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Cil Employees’ Co Op Credit V Exemption, Society Limited, S Ward-1(2), Pune. Cummins Inida Ltd., Kothrud, Pune – 411038. Pan:Aabac8908M Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishore Phadke Revenue By Shri Sandeep Sathe – Jcit Date Of Hearing 08/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21 Dated 29.02.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144B Of The I.T .Act, 1961 Dated 28.09.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

2)(d) is hereby rejected Cumulatively, as discussed above in details and after careful analysis of section 80P(4) read with section 2(24) (viia) of the I.T. Act and considering the facts and circumstance of the case assessee it is held 4 that assessee is not eligible for deduction

Royal Western India Turf Club Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer TDS Ward 2(1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 7249/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Sanat KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri

Section 191Section 194BSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

Money paid to the horse owners would not attract the provisions of Section 194B of the Act even after introduction of amendment to Section 2(24) and Section 194B of the Act brought about by the Finance Act, 2021. The Hon’ble High Court held that the assessee could

Sheth Realtors, Mumbai vs. ACIT-CC-7(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5947/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Arun Khodpiashri Sandeep Singh Karhailsheth Realtors Vasant Oasis, Site Office, Upper Basement, Cts No.345A 1 To 3, 345A 5 To 6, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri (East), ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400059 Pan: Aavfa3975F

For Appellant: Dr. K ShivramFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250

employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the filing of IT return than there would not be any disallowance under Section 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of I.T. Act. 4. The appellant prays that: a. Disallowances under addition made to Work in Progress for the year

Slo Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6509/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Slo Automobiles Private Dy. Cit, Limited, Circle-2, Dehradun. 108-Haridwar Road, Vs. Dehradun-248001. Pan-Aancs8160M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 43B

Appellant was subsequently paid by the Assessee. The Ld. Counsel also submitted that VAT liability is not an income within the meaning of Section 2(24) of the Act as it was not credited to the P & L Account. The Ld. Counsel relying on plethora of Judgments sought for allowing

Gurmeet Singh, Panchkula vs. Income Tax Officer, Panchkula

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1287/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Tribunal.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 10(37)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 145B(1)Section 194LSection 2Section 2(24)Section 28Section 4Section 45(5)

enhanced compensation to be taxable as 3 Income from Other Sources, notwithstanding its earlier characterization under capital gains. (iv) A conjoint reading of Section 2(24), Section 2(28A), Section 4, Section 10(37), Section 14, Section 45(5), Section 56(2)(viii), Section 145B(1) and Section 194LA

Smt. Raj Bala, Chandigarh vs. DCIT/ACIT Circle 1(1), Chandigarh

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

ITA 1142/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT DR

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

been deposited after the statutory due dates prescribed under the respective Acts. Applying the provisions of section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x), the CPC held that belated deposits of employees’ contributions could not be allowed as deduction. It was further observed that the matter

The India Cements Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2663/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2663/Chny/2025 धििाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Year: 2021-22

For Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 250Section 43BSection 80Section 80I

Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), or any other fund for the The India Cements Ltd. :- 15 -: welfare of such employees" as per section 2(24)(x) of the Act. Section 36(1)(va) provides that any sum received by the assessee from any of his employees to which ... provisions of section 2(24)(x) apply, if such sum is credited by the assessee to the employee's account in the relevant fund or funds on or before the due date as specified under the relevant Act. A combined perusal of the above provisions of the Act make

Jag Mohan, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 18, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 7055/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं.7055/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2014-15) Jag Mohan, 354, Tarun Enclave, Pitampura, ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Delhi 110034 Pan Ahdpm-3671-M बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle-18, New Delhi अपीलार्थी द्वारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Raghav Sharma, Mohit Gupta, Chartered Accountants & Ms. Chandrima Choudhary, Advocate प्रधिवािीद्वारा/Respondent By : Ms. Namita Khurana Cit-Dr & Shri Om Prakash, Sr.Dr सुिवाई की निथर्थ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/10/2025 घोषणा की निथर्थ/ Date Of Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, New Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 18/09/2017, For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. A Search & Seizure Operation U/S.132 Of The Income Was Conducted On 26.08.2013 In The Case Of Mohan India Group. The Assessee Is One Of The Directors Of Mohan India Group & The Assessee Was Also Covered Under Said Search. During

For Appellant: S/Shri Raghav Sharma, Mohit Gupta, CharteredFor Respondent: Ms. Namita Khurana CIT-DR &

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

total amount Rs.947.42 crores i.e. Rs.473.71 crores in the hands of each director holding it as the income under section 2(24)(iv) of the Act. 3.3. The first plank of argument made by ld. AR of the assessee is that income can be charged only if it falls under ... made addition u/s.2(24)(iv) of the Act which is a section for the definition and not the charging section. Only provisions of section 2(24)(iv) of the Act cannot be invoked for making addition. In first appellate proceedings the CIT(A) has sustained the addition by giving

Smt. Urmila Dhelia, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 23(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4259/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(vi)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

Appellant on re-development would be in the nature of capital receipt and the same is not includible in income as per section 2(24)(vi); (ii) the Appellant received 6,20,500/- being 10% of the Corpus Money during the previous year as advance which was refundable if certain ... received a sum of Rs. 6,20,500/-who treated this hardship compensation as a capital receipt, not includible in income as per section 2(24) of the Act. As the hardship compensation was not considered as income in the return of income by treating the same as capital receipts

Friends Salt Works and Allied Industries, Gandhidham vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Gandhidham

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

ITA 169/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Puglia, Ld. (CIT) DR

Section 143(3)

manner under any head of income. It is not liable for tax for the assessment year under consideration in terms of sections 2(24) 28, 45 and 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Carbon credits are made available to the assessee on account of saving of energy consumption ... element of profit or gain and it cannot be liable for tax for the assessment year under consideration in terms of sections 2(24) 28, 45 and 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Carbon credits are made available to the assessee on Page 16 of 22 Friends Salt Works

Friends Salt Works & Allied Inds., Gandhidham vs. The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range Gandhidham, Gandhidham

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

ITA 99/RJT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Puglia, Ld. (CIT) DR

Section 143(3)

The India Cements Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1) Chennai, Chennai

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

ITA 2174/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Section 10(39)Section 115JSection 14A

invited our attention to the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2015, by way of insertion of clause (xviii) in section 2(24) of the Act, in terms of which, any and all subsidies, irrespective of its nature/purpose, has been defined to constitute taxable 'business income ... onwards. It is observed that, in the Finance Act, 2015, the Legislature has amended the definition of `income' by inserting clause (xviii) in section 2(24), which read as under:- "assistance in the form of subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty drawback or waiver or concession or reimbursement

Ishares Core Msci Total International Stock Etf (As A Successor to Ishare Core Taotal International Stock Mauritius Company ), Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (Int. Tax)-2(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6774/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor To Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company) C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aafci3337N V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Tax) - 2(2)(2) Room No.606, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, ……………… Respondent C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aabti7439L ............... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Pranav GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 70Section 70(2)

long term capital gains not chargeable to tax under the IM Treaty form part of the 'total income' of the Appellant as per section 2(24) of the Act read with section 4 and 5 of the Act. 9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should ... exempt by the assessee under the provisions of India-Mauritius DTAA are in the nature of income as per the provisions of section 2(24) of the Act, read with sections 4 and 5 of the Act. The AO held that the operation of section 90(2

Ishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor to Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Tp) 2(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6051/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Pranav GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 70Section 70(2)