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)

Baba Hotels Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assesses is dismissed

ITA 2970/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2970/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Commissioner Of Baba Hotels Pvt. Ltd Income Tax (Appeals) Mumbai बिधम/ Delhi. A-101, Bhaveshwar Arcade, Vs. National Faceless Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar(W), Appeal Centre, New Mumbai 400086 Delhi स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaccb9563C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Ms. Anita Thakur अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Minal Kamble Sr.Dr. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 31.01.2023 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 31.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 03.10.2022, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For Ay 2018-19 In Relation To The Adjustment In The Intimation U/S 143(1).

For Respondent: Shri Minal Kamble
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 41Section 43B

The Freyssinet Prestressed Concrete Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1327/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Freyssinet Prestressed Concrete Co. Dy. Cit, Circle-6(2) Ltd. Mumbai 6-B, Sterling Centre, Vs. 6Th Floor, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 018

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AggarwalFor Respondent: Shri Vranda U. Matkarni
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

Bhargavi Hotels and Resorts Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 419/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jan 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Ld. Cit (A). However, The Ld. Cit (A) Dismissed The Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Consequently The Assessee Has Preferred The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal On The Grounds Mentioned Hereunder :-

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Prakash Meena (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

G S Build Estate P. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, WD-6(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 377/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jan 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Due Date Of Filing Of Return & By Not Following The Binding Decision Of Jurisdictional High Court Of Rajasthan That If The Employees Contribution Is Deposited Before Due Date, No Disallowance Could Be Made U/S 36(1)(Va) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monish Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Rcl Agencies East India Private Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1073/CHNY/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 43B

Asst CIT RG 10(3)(2), Thane vs. Pantaloon Industries Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2566/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. A.R
Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)

Pil Industries, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

ITA 1825/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. A.R
Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)

Asst CIT 10(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Pantaloon Industries Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1434/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. A.R
Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)

M/S Premier Irrigation Adritec (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 387/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

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

Randhir Rana, Ballabhgarh vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Faridabad

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 2660/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2020-21
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Krishna Prakashan Media Pvt Ltd, Uttar Pradesh vs. ITO, Ward 1(1)(3), Uttar Pradesh

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 2168/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi(Assessment Year : 2019-20 Krishna Prakashan Media Vs. Ito Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 1(1)(3), 11, Krishna House Uttar Pradesh Shivaji Road Meerut, Meerut-250 001 Pan No. Aaack 9668 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By --None-- Revenue By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 15.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.01.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi, No. Dated 01.08.2022 In Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1044403913(1), Relating To The A.Y. 2019-20 Passed Under Section 250 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under:- Krishna Prakashan Media Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito 2

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Naguttu Bhavani, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(5), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1152/BANG/2022[2019]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Naguttu Bhavani, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(5), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1151/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Mgi Infra Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-16(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is 11

ITA 6500/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhary

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Jeetender Chand
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

Tiberwala Electronics Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 425/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 36(1)(va)

Tiberwala Electronics Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 424/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 36(1)(va)

Soltek Insolation P. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 285/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2019-20 Soltek Insolation Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward-7(1), Kolkata C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Vs. Floor, Suite No. 203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata-700001. (Pan: Aatcs 0007 M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.04.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “I. For That On A Proper Interpretation Of The Scope & Ambit Of The Provisions Of Section 43B Read With S. 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – Nfac Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc In Resorting To The Impugned Disallowance Of Rs. 42,35,172/- In The Instant Case & The Purported Finding On That Behalf Is Absolutely Arbitrary, Unreasonable & Perverse.

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

Bharai Industrial Promoters Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 987/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jan 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.987/Chny/2022 (िनधा1रण वष1 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Bhari Industrial Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Acit No.4, Buhari Building, 3Rd Floor, बनाम Corporate Circle-1(1), Moores Road, Thousand Lights, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai – 600 006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacb-3142-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ("#थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri V. Padmanaban (Fca) – Ld. A.R "#थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar - (Jcit) – Ld. D.R सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12-01-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-01-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): 1. In The Aforesaid Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18, The Sole Issue That Fall For Our Consideration Is Disallowance Of Late Payment Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf / Esi In Terms Of Sec.43B R.W.S. 36(1)(Va) As Well As Sec.2(24)(X). During Hearing, It Transpires That This Issue, On Merits, Now Stood Covered Against The Assessee By The Recent Decision Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Bunch Of Appeals Titled As Checkmate Services P. Ltd. Vs Cit (Civil Appeal No.2833 Of 2016 Dated

For Appellant: Shri V. Padmanaban (FCA) – Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar - (JCIT) – Ld. D.R
Section 2(24)(x)Section 43B

M/S Maestro Steel Detailng Private Limited, Chennai vs. Che-W-(254)(1) / CPC

In the result, the appeal stand dismissed

ITA 944/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jan 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.944/Chny/2022 (िनधा1रण वष1 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S. Maestro Steel Detailing Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 73 & 74, K.P. Nagar, Kamarajar Salai, Cpc, Bangalore Vs. Ramapuram, Chennai – 600 089. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaicm-6960-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ("#थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None "#थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar - (Jcit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12-01-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-01-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ():

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar - (JCIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 43B

M/S. Brothers Outsourcing Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bashettyhalli vs. The ITO, Ward- 1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1137/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B