Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 2(24)(x) is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 of the 2,270 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

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.

CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd.
350 ITR 327 · 2013 · High Court
425
citing judgments

Deduction for employee contributions to EPF/ESI is allowable under section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1), irrespective of the due dates under the respective welfare fund statutes.

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.

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.

13/257 Taxman 120/406 ITR 150 (Ker.) 2. CIT v. Gujarat Road Transport Corpn
223 Taxmann 398 · 2014 · High Court
220
citing judgments
CIT v. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited
366 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court
206
citing judgments

Employees' contribution towards Provident Fund (PF) and Employees' State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) is allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B if deposited before the due date of filing the income tax return, even if deposited after the expiry of the statutory time period specified in the applicable fund's statute.

Judgments on Section 2(24)(x)

Ssnr Projects Private Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. DCIT/ACIT, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 150/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.150/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Ssnr Projects Private Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.51-8-40, Behind Boc Limited Income Tax Seethammadhara Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam Pan : Aarcs2464C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: None (Shri DM Rao, AR)For Respondent: Shri Madhukar Aves, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S O Clock Software Private Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 663/CHNY/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Nov 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.663/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/S. O Clock Software Private The Acit, Cpc, Bengaluru/ Limited, No. 1, Eighth Floor A Wing, Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Parsn Manere, Anna Salai, Income Tax (Osd), Chennai 600 006. Ltu Circle – 1, Chennai. [Pan:Aabco2328M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivsan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.11.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03.11.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 13.06.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2020-21. Vide Order In M.P. No. 89/Chny/2023 Dated 03.11.2023, The Captioned Appeal Order Dated 26.09.2022 Has Been Recalled & Restored For Fresh Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivsan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 41Section 43B

Innovatiview India Private Limited, Noida vs. ACIT Circle 10(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1081/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: The Due Date & Has Wrongly Applied Provision Of Sec 143(1) & Section 2(24)(X) Read M/S Innovatiview India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 1(1), Bhilai, Durg vs. Bhilai Jaypee Cement Ltd., Bhilai, Durg

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 241/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No.241/Rpr/2023) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax 1(1), V Bhilai Jaypee Cement Ltd, Bhilai, Durg S Bsp Premises, Slag Yard Road (Opp Sector 4 Nmoh), Bhilai Pan: Aadcb1675Q (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri. R.B. Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25-10-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of : 30-10-2023 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

For Appellant: Shri. R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)(x)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

Kmtc (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai

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

ITA 2254/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Kmtc (India) Private Limited Cit(A) 2202, 22Nd Floor, Indiabulls Finance Mumbai -400 020 Centre, Tower 3, Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Elphinstone Road (W), Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aafck 2156 D (Appellant) (Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar Revenue By : Shri P. D. Chougule Date Of Hearing : 26.10.2023 : 27.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 35D

Master Polishers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1762/MUM/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ujjawal Kumar Chavan, Sr
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

ACIT, Circle-3(1), New Delhi vs. Arise India Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 3962/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Years : 2012-13] Dcit, Vs M/S. Arise India Ltd., Circle-3(1), Room No.380B, B-38, Jain Chowk, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Mangla Puri, Palam, New Delhi. New Delhi-110045. Pan-Aadca3432E Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Acit, Vs M/S. Arise India Ltd., Circle-3(1), Room No.380B, B-38, Jain Chowk, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Mangla Puri, Palam, New Delhi-110002. New Delhi-110045. Pan-Aadca3432E Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, Cit Dr Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 25.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.10.2023 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : Both Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)-1, New Delhi Dated 23.08.2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 & Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)-32, New Delhi Dated 27.12.2017 For The Assessment Year 2014- 15. The Appeals Are Taken Up Together For Hearing & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

Section 143(3)Section 68

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Arise India Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 5714/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Years : 2012-13] Dcit, Vs M/S. Arise India Ltd., Circle-3(1), Room No.380B, B-38, Jain Chowk, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Mangla Puri, Palam, New Delhi. New Delhi-110045. Pan-Aadca3432E Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Acit, Vs M/S. Arise India Ltd., Circle-3(1), Room No.380B, B-38, Jain Chowk, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Mangla Puri, Palam, New Delhi-110002. New Delhi-110045. Pan-Aadca3432E Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, Cit Dr Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 25.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.10.2023 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : Both Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)-1, New Delhi Dated 23.08.2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 & Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)-32, New Delhi Dated 27.12.2017 For The Assessment Year 2014- 15. The Appeals Are Taken Up Together For Hearing & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

Section 143(3)Section 68

Bihari Lal Menghani, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2011-12 is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee for AY 2018-19 is dismissed

ITA 1623/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)

M/S Bihari Lal Menghani, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2011-12 is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee for AY 2018-19 is dismissed

ITA 1678/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)

M/S. Ravi Developments, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle -2, Thane

ITA 765/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

M/S. Ravi Developments, Mumbai vs. The ACIT Central Cir -2 Thanee, Thane

ITA 764/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

Tex-Styles International Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1915/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

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

Abhipra Capital Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1494/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI G.S PANNU, HON’BLE (President), SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri V. Rajkumar, Adv
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 43B

DCIT Circle Center-15, New Delhi vs. B.L Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the CO of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2701/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. C. M. Garg, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Rohtagi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43

M/S Hardayal Singh Patel, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

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

ITA 189/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 189/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Hardayal Singh Patel 43, Golden Homes, Vip Estate, Khamardih (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aabfh5997A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B. Subramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43B

Ravindra Dnyaneshwr Bhujbal, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(5), Pune

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

ITA 1017/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19
For Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(24)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Phoenix Udyog Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 39/KOL/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.39/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Phoenix Udyog Pvt. Ltd.……….....................................……………....Appellant 9, Vishal Market, West Mukherjee Nagar, New Delhi-110009. [Pan: Aaccp4046N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata.......…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. M. Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ankur Goyal, Jcit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 18, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.12.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

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

Tupperware India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 1741/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1741/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Tupperware India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 204-206, Tolstoy House, Cpc, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact3770D Assessee By : Sh. Rohit Tiwari, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Amit Katoch, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.10.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Tiwari, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, CIT-DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43

Torpical Agro System India Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both assessment years

ITA 905/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri I. Dinesh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)