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)

Ajay Saindas Mehra, Juhu Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 17 1 1 Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 3672/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: AAEPM0151C
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

Ajay Saindas Mehra, Juhu Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 17 1 1 Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 3671/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: AAEPM0151C
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

Ajay Saindas Mehra, Juhu Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 17 1 1 Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 3670/MUM/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: AAEPM0151C
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

Bsc C&C Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle-61(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1301/DEL/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Smt. Renu Jauhri

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 92C

Atiabari Tea Company Limited, Sevoke Road Siliguri vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 1(1), Jalpaiguri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3164/KOL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuita Nos.3164/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year: 2024-25)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Lata Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Mithabhi Lamps Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Delhi

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

ITA 8191/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Bhati, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Tata Projects Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3818/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Bleshri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

ACIT-CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Projects Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3723/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Bleshri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

Appt Fashion, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 28(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1972/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member)

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

Gurmeet Singh Hora, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 45/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 45/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gurmeet Singh Hora A-1, Sai Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaoph6268D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Center (Cpc), Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Sultanpur Zila Sahkari Bank Limited, Sultanpur vs. ACIT, DCIT Circle Faizabad

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

ITA 383/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Sultanpur Zila Sahkari Bank Vs Acit, Limited, Collectorate Campus, Circle-Faizabad Allahabad Road, Sultanpur City, S.O. Sultanpur-228001, India Pan: Aanas6008C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sh. Amit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.06.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 21.03.2025, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Filed Against The Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer For The A.Y. 2017-18, Under Section 143(3) On 26.12.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sultanpur (Hereinafter Referred The Ld. A.O.) Erred On Facts & In Law Passing The Assessment Order 263/143(3) Of The Act Without Appreciating The Fact That The Original Assess Order Passed On 20.12.2017 Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Int Of The Revenue. 2. The Ld. A.O. Erred On Facts & In Law In Making Addition Of Rs.7.46 C To The Returned Loss Of The Appellant By Way Of Invoking The Provisions Of Se 2(24)(X) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Without Appreciating The Facts Of The Case & Ignoring The Prevailing Law. 3. The Ld. A.O. Erred On Facts & In Law In Making Addition Of Rs.7.46 Crores Returned Loss Of The Appellant Without Appreciating The Fact That The Gross Arm Of Rs.7.46 Crores Was Pertaining To Different Previous Years Without Making

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 234ASection 250

M/S Cico Technologies Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-4(2), C.R. Building, Delhi

ITA 6199/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 36(1)(va)

Cico Technologies Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 4(2), Delhi

ITA 6198/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 36(1)(va)

Pancham Kumar Mishra, Deoghar vs. ITO, Deoghar

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 38/RAN/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi24 Jun 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 139(1)Section 43B

Pancham Kumar Mishra, Deoghar vs. ITO, Deoghar

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 37/RAN/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi24 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 139(1)Section 43B

ITO, Ward-5, Rohtak vs. Rajbir L/H Shri Rajesh, Rohtak

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

ITA 2576/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaito, Ward 5, Vs. Rajbir, Rohtak. (Through Legal Heir Shri Rajesh), H.No.778/1, Saini Anandpura, Rohtak (Haryana). (Pan : Avpps5601P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2026 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. The Revenue Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 25.08.2022 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Revenue Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal :-

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1696/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jun 2026AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal V. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 26ASection 36(1)(va)

Mahidhara Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1691/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Jun 2026AY 2018-19
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 14ASection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40

Mahidhara Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1690/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Jun 2026AY 2017-18
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 14ASection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40

Mi2C Business Enterprises Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 16(1) Delhi, New Delhi

In the result all three appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1363/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Naveen Chandraita Nos. 1361, 1362 & 1363/Del/2026 (Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Mi2C Business Enterprises Vs. Dcit Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 16(1) 8/40, Ugf, South Patel Nagar Delhi New Delhi – 110 008 Pan: Aahcm 9613 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nitin Kanwar, Adv., Shri Rajiv Kumar, Adv. & Shri Shivam Jain, Adv. Revenue By Shri Sangeet Bansal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 04.06.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.06.2026 Order Per Naveen Chandra: These Captioned Three Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Addl/Jcit, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred As ‘Cit(A)’) Order Dated 08.12.2025 Arising From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(1) Of The Act Dated 15.03.2019 For The A.Y. 2017-18, Order Under Section 143(1) Of The Act Dated 12.01.2020 For The A.Y. 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B