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)

M/S. Castron Technologies Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 451/KOL/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 37(1)

M/S. Castron Technologies Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 450/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 37(1)

M/S Edac Engineering Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 68/CHNY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.68/Chny/2023 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S. Edac Engineering Ltd. Vs The Adit, Spic House, 88, Mount Road, Centralized Processing Center Bengaluru-560 500. Guindy, Chennai-600 032. Pan:Aabcs 0321G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, JCITFor Respondent: 28.03.2023
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

ITO-28(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bhupendra Rampratap Singh, Mumbai

ITA 2983/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri A.M. Shetty, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Gupta, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 43B

New Tea Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-4(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 609/KOL/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Mar 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sajnay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250(6)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

Macrotech Deveopers Limited (Sucessor to Shreeniwas Cotton Mills Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range-7(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned assessing officer and assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2040/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm M/S. Macrotech Developers Limited (Successor Of Shreeniwas Cotton Dcit, Cc-7(3) Mills Ltd) 412, 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Room No. 655, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Chamber, Cawasji Patel Street, Fort Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Macrotech Developers Limited (Successor Of Shreeniwas Cotton Mills Ltd) Dcit, Cc-7(3) 412, 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Room No. 655, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Chamber, Cawasji Patel Street, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Fort Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacl1490J Assessee By : Shri Niraj Sheth Revenue By : Shri Asif Karmali

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(va)

Sudhakar Rao Dondapati, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-13(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 129/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं/Ita No. 129/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sudhakar Rao Dondapati, Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad Vs. Ward-13(3), [Pan No. Aeupr8022H] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri T. Balaji, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख /Date Of Hearing: 21/03/2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख /Pronouncement On: 21/03/2023

For Appellant: Shri T. Balaji, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waseem UR Rehman, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

A.C.I.T., Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Descon Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 1648/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 1648/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Descon Ltd. Tax – Circle-2(1), Kolkata Vs Plot No. X -1,2,3, Block-Ep, Sector V Salt Lake City Kolkata - 700091 [Pan : Aaacd9410G] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/01/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: This Is The Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 16, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 26/03/2019 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Revenue Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.56,07,000/- Made By The Ao On Account Of Rent & Connectivity Charges As Because The Assessee Follows The Mercantile Basis Of Accounting System & The Expenses Should Be Recorded As & When It Arises. 2. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.33,82,434/- Made By The Ao On Account Of The Employees Contribution To Pf/Esi As Because It Violates The Provision Of Sec.36(1)(Va) Read With Sec 2(24)(X) Of The It Act & It Contradicts The Board'S Circular No. 22/2015 Dated 17.12.2015, Para No. 5 Where It Is Clarified That "This Circular Does Not Apply To Claim Of Deduction Relating To Employee'S Contribution To Welfare Fund Which Are Governed By Sec.36(1)(Va) Of The Act".

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 68

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

Incedo Technology Solutions Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle -10(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 460/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2017-18
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

National Housing Bank, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special Range-6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 1242/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2019-20
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1 (1), Dibrugarh vs. Banamalie Tea Estate, Dibrugarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands allowed

ITA 46/GTY/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati15 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.46/Gty/2022 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Ito, Ward-1(1), Dibrugarh..…...…….....…..................….…… Appellant Vs. Banamalie Tea Estate……....……........………..…...…..…..... Respondent 4Th Floor, Pushkara House, Natun Gaon, Nh-37, Dibrugarh, Assam-786008. [Pan: Aabfb5352K] Appearances By: Shri Aakash Agarwal, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N.T. Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 15, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 15, 2023

Section 2Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 3Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Banshidhar Sewbhagovan & Co., Dibrugarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Dibrugarh

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

ITA 63/GTY/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati15 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No.63/Gty/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Banshidhar Sewbhagovan & Co, Dibrugarh......................……….……Appellant 5Th Floor, Juction Mall, R.K.B. Path, Dibrugarh, Assam- 786001. [Pan: Aadfb7460J] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Dibrugarh ……..…............…….......................…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N.T. Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 15, 2023 Order Per Manish Borad: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2019-20 Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 22.09.2021 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Assessing Officer Dated 01.05.2020. 2. The Case Was Called For. None Appeared For The Assessee. In The Past, Various Notices Have Been Served Through Rpad But There Is No Compliance. We, Therefore, Deem It Fit To Hear This Appeal With The Assistance Of Ld. Dr & The Available Records. 3. From The Perusal Of The Grounds Of Appeal, The Grievance Of The Assessee Is Two-Fold. Firstly, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming Disallowance U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S 2(24)(X) Of The Act For The Delay Of

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

Shri Arun Kumar Shrivastava, Indore vs. Asstt, Director of Income Tax, Indore

ITA 98/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Shri Arun Kumar Adit, Cpc, Shrivastava, Bangalore 9, Shakti Nagar, Vs. Kanadia Road, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aopps 9595 H Assessee By Shri Soumya Bomb, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.03.2023

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

M/S. Ritspin Synthetics Ltd., Pithampur vs. The DCIT, /CPC, Banglore

ITA 341/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S Ritspin Synthetics Dcit, Cpc, Ltd. Bangalore Plot No.2, Kheda Vs. Industrial Growth Center, Pithampur District - Dhar (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacr 8303 E Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.03.2023

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40A(7)

M/S Vijay Pulses, Indore vs. The ACIT 4(1), Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 205/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S. Vijay Pulses, Dcit, Cpc, 12, Sajan Nagar, Bangalore Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaafv 9714 E Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.03.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 154Section 43B

Kavungal Vareed Itteera, Kerala vs. ACIT, Ernakulam

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 855/COCH/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad vs. R S Brothers Retail India Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad

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

ITA 664/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Dy. C. I. T. Vs. M/S. R.S. Brothers Retail Circle 3(1) India (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Afspm0441A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 06/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/03/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.07.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2019-20. 2. There Is A Delay Of 49 Days In Filing Of This Appeal By The Revenue For Which The Revenue Has Filed A Condonation Petition. After Considering The Contents Of The Condonation Application Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay & After Hearing The Learned Counsel For The Assessee, The Delay In Filing Of This Appeal By The Revenue Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy, DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)

K M Automobiles, Korba vs. Income Tax Officer -1, Korba

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

ITA 100/RPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 100/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 K M Automobiles Plot No.187, Transport Nagar, Korba, Chhatisgarh-495 677 Pan: Aanfk0386L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S Tesla Transformers (India) Ltd, Bhopal vs. ACIT 3(1) Bhopal, Bhopal

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

ITA 190/IND/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Tesla Transformers Acit 3(1) (India) Ltd. Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aagct 8705 J Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.03.2023

Section 115BSection 143(1)