Section 36(1)(v) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.29, 30, 31, 32

Section 36(1)(v) falls under section 36 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 29 (Deductions related to employee welfare), section 30 (Deduction on certain premium), section 31 (Deduction for bad debt and provision for bad and doubtful debt) and section 32 (Other deductions) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 29 of the 2025 ActRead section 30 of the 2025 ActRead section 31 of the 2025 ActRead section 32 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 36(1)(v) is CIT v. Textool Co. Ltd. (216 Taxmann 327), cited in 29 of the 124 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 36(1)(v)

CIT v. Textool Co. Ltd.
216 Taxmann 327 · 2013 · Supreme Court
29
citing judgments

Payments made by an employer directly to the LIC towards an employees' group gratuity fund are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(v) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, provided the employer has no control over these funds.

385 ITR 592 (Kar. H.C.) 13. CIT v. VMD Mills P. Ltd.
434 ITR 671 · 2021 · High Court
8
citing judgments
Assam Tea House v. CIT
25 Taxmann.com 93 · 2012 · High Court
5
citing judgments
Pr. CIT v. English Indian Clays Ltd.
89 Taxmann.com 134 · 2018 · High Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 36(1)(v)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune vs. Sandvik Coromant India Pvt Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1072/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1072/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Dy.Commissioner Of Sandvik Coromant India Pvt. Income Tax, Circle-8, Vs Ltd., Pune. Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune – 411012. Pan: Aaccs6638K Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Cross Objection No.7/Pun/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sandvik Coromant India The Dy.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune. Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune – 411012. Pan: Aaccs6638K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Patakh – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – Dr Date Of Hearing 15/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Ita 1072/Pn/2023 Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection Co No.7/Pun/2024 Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] U/S.250 Of The Act, For A.Y.2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 43B

Twinings (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-4(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 391/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(v)Section 37(1)

Savita Oil Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-8(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1258/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1258/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Savita Oil Technologies बिधम/ Acit, Central Circle-8(4) Ltd. Room No. 659, Aayakar Vs. 66/67, Nariman Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai- New Marine Line, 400021. Mumbai-400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs3513J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Yogesh Thar/Chaitanya Joshi Revenue By: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia (Sr. Ar) Shri Virabhadra Mahanjan (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/07/2023/ (20/10/2023) घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax-50, Mumbai Dated 24.02.2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The First Ground Of Appeal Of The Assessee Is As Under: - “1(A) The Appellant Submits That The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [(“Cit(A)”)] Erred In Not Allowing The Claim Towards Expenditure On Account Of Gratuity Representing Amount Actual Paid To An Approved Gratuity Fund Of Rs.83,69,981/- Representing Employer'S Contribution. (B) The Appellant Submits That Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Aforesaid Amount Of Rs.83,69,981/- Was Paid On Or Before The Due Date For Filing Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2017-18 To An Approved Gratuity Fund

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar/Chaitanya JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia (Sr. AR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)Section 43BSection 80GSection 80I

Parag Milk Foods Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 4, Pune

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 177/PUN/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.177/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Parag Milk Foods Ltd., The Assistant Awasari Phata,Village Manchar, Vs Commissioner Of Income Tal - Ambegaon, Tax, Circle-4, Pune. Dist-Pune – 411503. Pan: Aabcp 0425 G Assessee/ Appellant Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 24/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/06/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)[Ld.Cit(A)], Pune-11 Dated 04.02.2022 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Dated 26.12.2018 For A.Y.2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Assessing Officer Of Making An Addition Of Rs.1,15,71,588/- On Account Of Disallowance Of Deduction U/Sec.80Ia Of The Act On The Ground That The Assessee Has Not Complied With The Conditions Which Are Necessary To Claim Deduction U/Sec.80Ia Of The Act & Failed To Furnish Any Concrete Evidence To Prove That The Parag Milk Foods Ltd., [A]

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(7)Section 80I

DCIT-15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Tata Projects Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 463/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Dy. Cit-15(3)(1), M/S Tata Projects Limited, Room No. 460, 4Th Floor, Floor, 2, 3 & 4 One Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Boulevard, Lake Boulevard Mumbai-400020. Street Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai-400076. Pan No. Aaact 4119 L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Mr. Biswananth Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(v)Section 43BSection 86

O.S. Motors Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur` vs. Principal Commissioner of Income, Jodhpur

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

ITA 54/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur16 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmim/S. O.S. Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Pr. Cit Sainiks Motor Building, Chopasani Jodhpur-1 Road, Jodhpur-342001 (Raj) Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco 1896 R

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194HSection 263Section 36(1)(v)Section 40

Unity Hospital P. Ltd, Thrissur vs. ACIT, Thrissur

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 69/COCH/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri B. Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR

M/S Athenahealth Technology Private Limited, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 82/CHNY/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.82/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Athenahealth Technology The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Module 3 & 4, 9Th Floor Vs. Corporate Circle-1(1), S.P Infocity, Dr. Mgr Road, Chennai. Kandaanchanvadi, Perungudi, Chennai – 600 096. [Pan: Aafca-3257-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Sumeet Khurana, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.09.2022

For Appellant: Shri Sumeet Khurana, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 40ASection 40A(7)(a)Section 40A(7)(b)

M/S. Servewell Household Appliances, Shaper-Veraval, Dist. Rajkot vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

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

ITA 139/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 139/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2017-2018 M/S Servewell Household Appliances, The Principal Commissioner Plot No.16 & 20, Vs. Of Income Tax-1, Survey No.211 Rajkot-1, Nr. Roto Leaner Pvt. Ltd. Rajkot. Narmada Road Veaval-Shaper, Rajkot.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S. Avadh Hospital and Heart Centre, Lucknow vs. DCIT-6, Lucknow-New, Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 105/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Sachan, D.R
Section 36(1)(v)

M/S Avadh Hospital and Heart Centre, Lucknow vs. DCIT-6, Lucknow-New

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 104/LKW/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jun 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Sachan, D.R
Section 36(1)(v)

Jyoti Limited, Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(2), Baroda

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

ITA 1353/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Jyoti Ltd., Asstt. Commissioner Of Nanubhai Amin Marg, Vs Income-Tax, Industrial Area, Circle-1(2), Vadodara-390003 Baroda Pan : Aaacj 4909 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish J. Shah, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Mohd Usman, Cit-Dr & Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09/05/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/05/2022

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT-DR &
Section 263Section 36(1)(v)

The Andaman & Nicobar State Corporation Bank Ltd., Port Blair vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-3(2), Port Blair

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 364/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am]

Section 36(1)(v)Section 37Section 40A(7)Section 4ASection 4A(1)Section 4A(2)

Sunil Prakash, Faridabad vs. DCIT CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 727/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2018-19 Sunil Prakash, Vs. Dcit, C/O Rra Taxindia, Cpc, D-28, South Extension Part-1, Bengaluru. New Delhi. Pan: Afvpp5777K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25Th May, 2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Diesel Generating Set & Also Is A Contractor. He Filed His Return Of Income On 30.11.2018 Declaring An Income Of Rs.6,97,72,959/-. The Cpc, Bangalore, Issued Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 15Th December, 2019 Making An Addition Of Rs.1,43,36,615/- For Late Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf & Esi. In Appeal, The Ld.Cit(A) Upheld The Action Of The Ao On The Ground That Although The Payment Has Been Made Before Due Date Of Filing Of The Return, But, Same Has Not Been Deposited Within The Due Date Prescribed Under The Respective Acts.

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta &For Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(v)

M/S. Maass Flange India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1813/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1812 & 1813/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 36(1)(v)Section 37

M/S. Maass Flange India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1812/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1812 & 1813/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 36(1)(v)Section 37

Peartree Enterprises Pvt. Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-19(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7225/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35DSection 36(1)(v)Section 40Section 40A(3)

M/S. Paramount Communications Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5395/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 2(24)Section 36(1)(v)

The ACIT.Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. Gujarat State Co.Op. Marketing Federation Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1851/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1851/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 A.C.I.T, Gujarat State Co-Op. Marketing Circle-1(2), Vs. Federation Limited, Ahmedabad. 49, Shrimali Society, N.P. Patel Sahkar Bhavan, Opp. Navrangpura Police Station, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad380009. Pan: Aaaag2927K

For Appellant: Shri Nikunj Bagadiya, A.R
Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(v)

M/S. Maass Flange India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 363/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri A.M. Madhavan Krishnan
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(v)