Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.270

Section 143(1)(a) falls under section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 270 (Assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 270 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 143(1)(a) is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 of the 1,112 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 143(1)(a)

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).

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.

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.

Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
366 ITR 408 · 2014 · High Court
519
citing judgments

An employer's delayed remittance of employees' contributions to provident fund (PF) or Employees' State Insurance (ESI) is deductible if the payment is made before the due date for filing the income tax return under section 139(1), applying the provisions of section 43B and notwithstanding section 36(1)(va).

CIT v. Vinay Cements Ltd.
213 CTR 268 · 2007 · Supreme Court
422
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to provident fund and ESI are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) if deposited by the assessee before the due date for filing the income tax return.

Commissioner of Income-Tax, Udaipur v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd.
35 Taxmann.com 616 · 2013 · High Court
304
citing judgments

No disallowance can be made under Section 36(1)(va) or Section 43B for delayed payment of employee's contributions to ESI or PF if these amounts are deposited by the assessee on or before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1). This aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions for allowability.

319 ITR 306 (SC); CIT v. Vinay Cement Ltd.
84 Taxmann.com 185 · 2017 · Supreme Court
300
citing judgments

Employee and employer contributions towards Provident Fund (PF) and Employees' State Insurance (ESI) are allowable deductions under sections 36(1)(va) and 43B, respectively, if deposited on or before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1), even if paid after the due date prescribed under the respective welfare legislation.

M/s Mahadev Cold Storage v. Jurisdictional AO
43 Taxmann.com 33 · 2014 · High Court
262
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds are an allowable deduction if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return under section 139(1), even if the payment is made beyond the due date specified by the respective welfare fund Acts, as per the provisions of section 43B.

313 ITR 137 (Bom.); 7. Spectrum Consultants India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT
34 Taxmann.com 20 · 2013 · High Court
228
citing judgments
616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd.
217 Taxmann 207 · 2013 · High Court
170
citing judgments

Prior to the insertion of Explanation 2 to Section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, there was an ambiguity regarding the due date for payment of employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI. The ambiguity was whether the due date was as per the respective Acts or the due date for filing the assessee's return of income.

Judgments on Section 143(1)(a)

B4S Solutions P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, all the three captioned appeals of the

ITA 2197/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

Mahaveer Bulk Carriers, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1000/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2023AY 2019-20
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel (DR.)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Globallogic Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Assessing Officer, Hyderabad

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

ITA 671/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Jan 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2020-21 Global Logic Technologies Vs. Assessing Officer (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aadcr5222K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: C.A Tanpreet Kohli Revenue By: Shri A.R. Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/01/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 3.10.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Delhi Relating To A.Y.2020-21. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In Rendering It Related Services. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 15.2.2022 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.26,67,20,510/- Under The Normal Provisions Of The Act & Book Profit Under The Provisions Of Section 115Jb At Rs.58,28,72,316/-. The Cpc Bangalore In Its Intimation U/S 143(1)(A) Of The Act Apart From Other Addition/Disallowance Made Disallowance Of Rs.2,28,56,810/- On Account Of Late Deposit Of Page 1 Of 5

For Appellant: C.A Tanpreet KohliFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)

M/S. Ashim Kar & Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 523/KOL/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)(a)Section 40

Lions Nab Community Eyecare Centre, Miraj, Sangli vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 258/PUN/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.258/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Lions Nab Community Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bangalore. Eyecare Centre, Plot No. P-39, Midc, Miraj, Sangli- 416410. Pan : Aabfl4373L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date Of Hearing : 30.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (‘Nfac’) Dated 21.03.2022 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Charitable Trust Incorporated Under The Provisions Of Trust Act. It Is Claimed That It Was Registered U/S 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’). The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 3

M/S Sumer Park Building No.1 Co.Op.Hsg. Soc. Ltd, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Mumbai

ITA 1132/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. Dharan Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Purnesh Gururani, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

I-Security Services, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1003/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2022AY 2019-20
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

M/S. Automac Diesels, Huballi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 338/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

The Balol Co-Operative Agricultural Service Society Limited, Kangra vs. ITO, Ward, Dharamshala

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 79/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

Davalagiri Property Developers Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 690/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri A Ravish Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.R Narayana, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 10Section 143(1)(a)Section 234

Tangar Exports LLP, Ranipet vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore / ACIT, Vellore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 666/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 666/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Tangar Exports Llp, Adit, No. 3 (Old No. 2A/4), Railway V. Cpc, Bengaluru, Station Road, Acit, Vellore. Ranipet – 632 401. [Pan: Aaift-3781-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. A. Mahesh, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234BSection 234CSection 80J

Pantnagar Ashtvinayak Chsl, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 27(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1848/MUM/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2022AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Pantnagar Ashtvinayak Chsl Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(2)(1) Building No. 244, Samata Colony, Mumbai Vs. Pantnagar, Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai-400 075 Pan/Gir No. Aaaap 8034 E (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Bhavya SundeshaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Arya Samaj, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 984/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Arya Samaj, Vs. Ito (Exemptions), Ward - 1, No.804/15, Swamy Shraddhanand Bhavan, Bengaluru. Vishveshvarapuram, Bengaluru – 560 004. Pan : Aacta 0479 K Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sudheendra B. R, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.11.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Sudheendra B. R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234F

Vinod Malik, Faridabad vs. ADIT, CPC, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1635/DEL/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari R., Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 80

M/S. IV Sanctum, Bengaluru vs. Additional Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 986/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Iv Sanctum, Vs. The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, #18/19, 4Th Cross, 5Th Main, Cpc, Gandhinagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 009. Pan : Aawfm 3697 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Nfac, Delhi, Dated 29.09.2022, Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Making A Disallowance On Delayed Payment Of Employee’S Contribution To Esi & Pf Of Rs.4,94,192/- Made By The Assessee Beyond The Due Date By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. On The Above Issue, It Is Not Disputed That As Per The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court Rendered In The Case Of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd Vs Cit-1 In Civil Appeal 2833/2016 Vide Its Judgment Dated 12 October 2022 Decided The Issue On Allowability/Treatment Of ‘Delayed’ Employee Pf Contribution Payment In Hands Of Assessee Under Provisions Page 2 Of 4

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Nalina Dyave Gowda, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 685/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2019-20 Ms. Nalina Dyave Gowda, Vs. The Adit, #129/25, Shree Paada, Cpc, Sanjeev Shetty Layout, Bidadi, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 109. Pan : Aqcpn 0102 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.06.2022 Of Nfac, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Making A Disallowance On Delayed Payment Of Employee’S Contribution To Esi & Pf Of Rs.14,58,631/- Made By The Assessee Beyond The Due Date By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. On The Above Issue, It Is Not Disputed That As Per The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court Rendered In The Case Of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd Vs Cit-1 In Civil Appeal 2833/2016 Vide Its Judgment Dated 12 October 2022 Decided The Issue On Page 2 Of 6

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

The Ruhru Co-Operative Agri Service Society Limited, Kangra vs. ITO Ward, Dharamshala

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 580/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Nov 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: ShriVishal Mohan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

Kema Logistics and Manufacturers Pvt Ltd, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Banglore

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

ITA 124/NAG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.124/Nag/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kema Logistics & The Dcit, Cpc, Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd, Vs Bangalore. 80B, Shivaji Nagar, Nagpur. Pan: Aabck 6785 E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri G.J.Ninawe – Dr Date Of Hearing 09/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 15/11/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal, (Nfac) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Passed On 02.08.2021. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1) The Hon'Ble Cit (Appeals) Erred In Law & On Facts By Dismissing The Appeal On The Ground That Epf Has Not Been Paid As Appeal Was Filed For Disallowance Of Bonus Payment. 2) The Learned Cit (Appeals) Erred In Law & On Facts By Holding That The Epf Payment Of Rs.9,75,173/- Remained Unpaid Before The Due Date Of Filing Return As The Amount Relates To Unpaid Bonus At The Year-End Which Was Duly Paid By The Appellant Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Return. 3) Any Other Ground That May Be Taken At The Time Of Hearing

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

Medi Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Medi, Dist. Amreli vs. The ADIT (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 38/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Oct 2022AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

Shri Trambakpur Sahakari Mandali Limited, at Trambakpur Taluka Dhari Dist. Amreli vs. The DCIT/ACIT (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 23/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Oct 2022AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80PSection 8O