← All Phrases

“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)

Kay Switcgears India Private Limited, Kapurthala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 24/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

specifically inserted by the Finance Act, 1987, w.e.f. 1-04-1988. Through the same amendment, by section 3(b), section 2(24) - which defines various kinds of "income" - inserted clause (x). This is a significant amendment, because Parliament intended that amounts not earned by the assessee, but received ... A.Ys.: 2019-20 & 2020-21 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

Ess Ess Kay Engineering Compay Private Limited, Kapurthala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 23/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

specifically inserted by the Finance Act, 1987, w.e.f. 1-04-1988. Through the same amendment, by section 3(b), section 2(24) - which defines various kinds of "income" - inserted clause (x). This is a significant amendment, because Parliament intended that amounts not earned by the assessee, but received ... A.Ys.: 2019-20 & 2020-21 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

M. K Hotel & Resorts Limited, Amritsar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Amritsar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 14/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.23/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 143(1)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

specifically inserted by the Finance Act, 1987, w.e.f. 1-04-1988. Through the same amendment, by section 3(b), section 2(24) - which defines various kinds of "income" - inserted clause (x). This is a significant amendment, because Parliament intended that amounts not earned by the assessee, but received ... A.Ys.: 2019-20 & 2020-21 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

Acro Hr Solutions India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1685/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Rohtagi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)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

Shri Sachin Kapur, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3 (2), Jalandhar

In the result, ITA No. 261/Asr/2022 is dismissed and ITA No

ITA 261/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

specifically inserted by the Finance Act, 1987, w.e.f. 1-04-1988. Through the same amendment, by section 3(b), section 2(24) - which defines various kinds of "income" - inserted clause (x). This is a significant amendment, because Parliament intended that amounts not earned by the assessee, but received ... 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

M/S. Ramco Engg Works, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 1 (1), Jalandhar

In the result, ITA No. 261/Asr/2022 is dismissed and ITA No

ITA 253/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

specifically inserted by the Finance Act, 1987, w.e.f. 1-04-1988. Through the same amendment, by section 3(b), section 2(24) - which defines various kinds of "income" - inserted clause (x). This is a significant amendment, because Parliament intended that amounts not earned by the assessee, but received ... 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

Sunbeam Auto Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 235/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Dble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Range-9, New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Addl. Cit Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Special Range-8, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Room No. 199A, New Delhi 110 017 C.R. Building, Pan Aabcs2948F New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Circle-24(2) New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shashi M Kapila, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 264Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(1)

this decision the Tribunal considered the amendment introduced by the Finance Act, 2015 & ITA No.235/Del/17 w.e.f. 01.04.2016 whereby the definition of income under section 2(24)(xviii) has been enlarged and held that since the amendment is effective from AY 2016-17, it will not apply to a case prior ... industrial development of the State, then the case is not caught within the mandate of Explanation 10. Taking note of the amendment in Section 2(24) by insertion of clause (Xviii) w.e.f. 01.04.2016 by the Finance Act, 2015 the Tribunal held that the amendment is effective from

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sunbeam Auto Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 5127/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Dble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Range-9, New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Addl. Cit Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Special Range-8, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Room No. 199A, New Delhi 110 017 C.R. Building, Pan Aabcs2948F New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Circle-24(2) New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shashi M Kapila, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 264Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(1)

this decision the Tribunal considered the amendment introduced by the Finance Act, 2015 & ITA No.235/Del/17 w.e.f. 01.04.2016 whereby the definition of income under section 2(24)(xviii) has been enlarged and held that since the amendment is effective from AY 2016-17, it will not apply to a case prior ... industrial development of the State, then the case is not caught within the mandate of Explanation 10. Taking note of the amendment in Section 2(24) by insertion of clause (Xviii) w.e.f. 01.04.2016 by the Finance Act, 2015 the Tribunal held that the amendment is effective from

Sunbeam Auto Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4378/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Dble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Range-9, New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Addl. Cit Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Special Range-8, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Room No. 199A, New Delhi 110 017 C.R. Building, Pan Aabcs2948F New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Circle-24(2) New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shashi M Kapila, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 264Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(1)

this decision the Tribunal considered the amendment introduced by the Finance Act, 2015 & ITA No.235/Del/17 w.e.f. 01.04.2016 whereby the definition of income under section 2(24)(xviii) has been enlarged and held that since the amendment is effective from AY 2016-17, it will not apply to a case prior ... industrial development of the State, then the case is not caught within the mandate of Explanation 10. Taking note of the amendment in Section 2(24) by insertion of clause (Xviii) w.e.f. 01.04.2016 by the Finance Act, 2015 the Tribunal held that the amendment is effective from

Smt Pushplata Chandrawat, Indore vs. The DCIT CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 180/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Smt. Pushplata Chandrawat, V. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. House No. 34-Bg, Scheme No. 74-C, Vijay Nagar, Indore Pan-Adapc8144L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ca Respondent By: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2023

For Appellant: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)

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

M/S Laurels School and Management Institution P.Ltd., Indore vs. DCIT 1(1), Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 137/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Laurels School & V. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. Management Institutions Pvt. Ltd. 7, Press Complex, A.B. Road, Behind Dainik Bhaskar Press, Indore. Pan-Aaacl4970D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ca Respondent By: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

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

Roshan Hospital, Bhopal vs. DCIT-5(1), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 109/IND/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2016-17 Roshan Hospital, Dcit/Acit, 7-A-B, Govind Garden, 5(1), Bhopal बनाम/ Raisen Road, Govindpura, Vs. Bhopal-462023 (Appellant /Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aasfr 4278 B Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri. Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 06.04.2023

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 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

Sadakat Ali, Prop S P Enterprises, Sonipat vs. ITO, Ward-4, Sonipat

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1709/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

within the due date prescribed under the statutes governing such payment in terms of section 36(1)(va) of the Act read with section 2(24)(x), such amount has to be treated as income of the assessee, hence, not allowable as deduction under Section 43B of the Act, even

The ITO 2 (2), Bhopal vs. Shri Munshiram Balkishan Verma, Bhopal

ITA 9/IND/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

Section 147Section 148Section 27(1)(c)Section 54B

materialize, there is no income or taxable income in the eyes of income-tax law. Ld. AR submitted that in terms of section 2(24) read with section 45(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Page 5 of 8 Munshiram Balkishan Verma ITA No.8 & 9/Ind/2020 Assessment year ... assessee that the impugned land has not been “transferred” and this conclusion is also accepted by Ld. CIT(A). We agree that section 2(24) read with section 45(1) of the act creates a tax liability only if there is a “transfer” of asset and not otherwise

The ITO 2 (2), Bhopal vs. Shri Munshiram Balkishan Verma, Bhopal

ITA 8/IND/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

Section 147Section 148Section 27(1)(c)Section 54B

materialize, there is no income or taxable income in the eyes of income-tax law. Ld. AR submitted that in terms of section 2(24) read with section 45(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Page 5 of 8 Munshiram Balkishan Verma ITA No.8 & 9/Ind/2020 Assessment year ... assessee that the impugned land has not been “transferred” and this conclusion is also accepted by Ld. CIT(A). We agree that section 2(24) read with section 45(1) of the act creates a tax liability only if there is a “transfer” of asset and not otherwise

ACIT-Circle-3(1), Gurgaon vs. Teradata India Private Limited, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 1431/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usasstt. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Teradata India Pvt. Income Tax, Circle – 3(1), Ltd., 301-302, Tower 4A, Gurugram S-Block Dlf Corporate Park, Dlf City Phase-Iii, Pan No. Aacct 6715 A Gurugram – 122 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Akshay Uppal, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Sangeeta Yadav, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 29.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.03.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.05.2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under :- Acit Vs. Teradata India Pvt Ltd. 2 3. Assessee Is A Company Who Had Filed Its Return Of Income On 27.11.2020 For A.Y. 2019-20 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.61,82,86,370 /-. In The Intimation Issued U/S 143(1) Of The Act By Cpc, Bangalore Vide Identification No. Cpc/1920/A6/2014289684 Dated 18.03.2021, The Total Income Was Determined At Rs. 66,49,98,020/- Inter Alia By Disallowing Rs.4,67,11,644/- U/S 36(1)(Va) On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees Contribution Of Pf/Esi.

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)

deposited before due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961, which is not law as per section 2(24)(x) r.w explanation 2 of section 36(1)(v).” 5. Before us, at the outset, Learned DR submitted though ACIT vs. Teradata India ... assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received by the assessee from his employees as contributions to any provident fund or superannuation fund or any fund

Transnational Drilling & Minning Associates Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 1834/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Ustransnational Drilling & Vs. Dcit Minning Associates Pvt. Cpc Ltd., Luv-303, Agrasen New Delhi Apartment, , Ip Extension, New Delhi-110 092 Pan No. Aadct 1249 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By --None-- Revenue By Ms. Sangeeta Yadav, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 29.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.03.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under :-

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

assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received by the assessee from his employees as contributions to any provident fund or superannuation fund or any fund

Khyber Industries Private Limited, Srinagar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle, Srinagar

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

ITA 31/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 250oSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

circumstances of the case in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 83, 21, 928/- invoking the provisions of section 36(1) (va) read with section 2(24) (x) on account of employees contribution to PF/ESI deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the said Acts though the same had been deposited

Aroma Aromatics & Flavours, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-28(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1634/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 1634/Del/2020 (A.Y 2017-18)

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

provides for deduction of any sum received by the assessee from any of his employees to which the provisions of section 2(24)(x) apply, if such sum is credited by the assessee to the employees account in the relevant fund or funds on or before the due date

M/S Beltex Rubber India, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 1 (1), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is dismissed

ITA 9/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(1)Section 250o

specifically inserted by the Finance Act, 1987, w.e.f. 1-04-1988. Through the same amendment, by section 3(b), section 2(24) - which defines various kinds of "income" - inserted clause (x). This is a significant amendment, because Parliament intended that amounts not earned by the assessee, but received ... 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