Which cases are most cited on Section 2(24)(x)?

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508) — 1,629 citing judgments; Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (143 Taxmann.com 178) — 1,392 citing judgments; CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306) — 1,344 citing judgments; CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170) — 1,158 citing judgments; 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises (298 ITR 141) — 706 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 2(24)(x)?

BharatTax indexes 2,270 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

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

Q: What is the leading case on Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508) is the decision most relied on for Section 2(24)(x), cited in 1,629 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).

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)

Nsib Security Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 738/KOL/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

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

Viari Exports Private Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 71/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 32/Chny/2023 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 70 & 71/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20, 2018-19 & 2020-21. Viari Exports Private Limited, Assistant Director Of Income No. 59/4A, Mrc Garden Road, V. Tax, Velappan Chavadi, Central Processing Centre, Chennai – 600 077. Bengaluru. [Pan:Aabcv-6500-A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.02.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2023

For Appellant: Shri. H. Yeshwanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Viari Exports Private Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 70/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri. H. Yeshwanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Hi-Tech Instruments & Systems, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 15/VIZ/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.15/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2019-20) Hi-Tech Instruments & Control Vs. Income Tax Officer, Systems, Ward-4(1), Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aadfh 9770 K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri D. Madhusudhana Rao, Ca ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri D. Madhusudhana Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. AR

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

Ocean Exim India Private Ltd, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 37/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prabha Rana (Adv.)For Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(A)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

G.S Developers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Range-10, Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 757/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Chandra Mohan Gargita Nos. 756 & 757/Del/2022 (Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2019-20) G. S. Developers & Vs. Acit Contractors Pvt. Ltd. Range -10 C-58, Community Centre, Delhi Sahapuri Tirath Singh Tower, New Delhi – 110058 Pan No. Aaacg 0870 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri D. K. Gupta, C.A Shri S. C. Malhotra, C.A Revenue By Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. D.R Date Of Hearing: 20.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 04.04.2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2019-20. 2. At The Outset, Learned Ar Submitted That The Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Are Identical Except For The Year & Amounts Involved & Therefore The Submissions Made By Him For One Year

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 43B

G.S Developers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Range-10, Delhi

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 756/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 43B

Amudha, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 72/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 72/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri B. Suresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT

Section 143(1)Section 154(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Lioyd Healthcare Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (CPC) Bangalore, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2342/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri S Rifaur Rahman () Lloyd Healthcare Pvt Ltd Vs Dcit (Cpc), Bangalore Unit No.3A, Wing B, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Times Square, Marol 400 020 Andheri Kurla Road Andheri East, Mumbai-400 059 Pan : Aaccl1129L Appellant Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)

Kapil Kumar Nehra, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 2677/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedikapil Kumar Nehra Vs. Ito 435/16, Nawal Cottage Ward – 2(2) Civil Line Near Pushpanjali Gurgaon Hospital, Gurgaon – 122 001

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

Creative Arts Education Society, Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-6, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed ex-parte

ITA 1048/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Anand, Sr.DR

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

Tapati Sinha, 24-Parganas (S) vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-29, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 560/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Feb 2023AY 2018-2019

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

Mohammad Shahid, Burdwan vs. I.T.O., Ward-1(1), Burdwan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 517/KOL/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Feb 2023AY 2019-2020

Section 143(1)Section 34Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Senbo Engineering Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 499/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Feb 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 499/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Senbo Engineering Limited Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Circle-12(2), Kolkata 87, Lenin Sarani Kolkata - 700013 [Pan : Aadcs6138B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 28/07/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Limited Company. Income Of Rs.2,53,38,150/- Declared In The Return Filed On 07/11/2017 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. Case Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass Followed For Serving Of Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings The First Issue Dealt By The Ld. Assessing Officer Was Regarding Cessation Of Liability U/S 41 Of The Act. The Ld. Assessing Officer Noted That In The 3Cd Report, The Auditor Has Mentioned About The Application Of Section U/S 41(1) Of The Act For The Unpaid Liability Of Rs.47,19,644/-. The Ld. Assessing Officer Also Examined The Other Outstanding Liabilities & Noticed That Regarding Outstanding Credit Of Rs.1,13,76,781/-, Pertaining To Ten Parties, Assessee Failed To Provide Any Detail About The Transactions Carried Out With These Parties I.E.

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT, D/R

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 41Section 41(1)

Inventurus Knowledge Solutions P. Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 3(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2222/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm It(Tp)A No. 2222/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Inventurus Knowledge Solutions Private The Assistant Cit, Range 3(2)(1) Limited Mumbai M/S. Serene Properties Private Limited Vs. (Sez) Unit No. 204, Building No.5, Mindspace, Airoli, Mumbai-400 708 Pan/Gir No. Aabc 15573 J (Appellant) : (Respondent) : Shri S. C. Tiwari Assessee By Revenue By : Ms. Samruddhi Dhananjay Hande Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Assessment Order

For Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Dhananjay Hande

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

New Vision Softeocom & Consultabcy P Ltd, Bhopal vs. The DCIT/ACIT 3(1), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 203/IND/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: The Last Date Of Filing The Income Tax Return U/S 139(1) Of The Act As Required By Section 43B(B) For Allowability Of Deduction On Actual Payment Basis.

For Appellant: Shri Aditya & Ajay Chhajad, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 234ASection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

Kwality Motel Shiraz, Bhopal vs. Asst Director of Income Tax CPC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 187/IND/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Feb 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEBER, SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTNT MEMBER Kwality Motel Shiraz 1, Shivaji Nagar, Bhopal-462021

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Fadnis, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Anjani Kumar Dwivedi, Durg vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 98/RPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 98/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Anjani Kumar Dwivedi Qtr. No. Lc 6/D, Street No.18, Camp-1, Bhilai, Dist. Durg (C.G.)-490 023 Pan: Aigpd3229G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Gitesh Kumar, Sr. DR

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

Hanuman Plantations Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 494/KOL/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar]

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

Care Container Lines Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ADIT, CPC / D.C.I.T., Circle - 7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 729/KOL/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 729/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Care Container Lines Pvt. Limited,.............Appellant 6B, Diamond Chamber, 8Th Floor, 4, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata-700016 [Pan: Aaecc8088R] -Vs.- Adit, Cpc/ Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata…….Respondent Centralized Processing Centre, Income Tax Department, Bengaluru/ Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 13, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 16, 2023 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B