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

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

Section 36(1)(va) 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)(va) is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 of the 6,054 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 36(1)(va)

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. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.
368 ITR 749 · 2014 · High Court
609
citing judgments

Deduction for employees' contributions to PF and ESIC is allowable under Section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return under Section 139(1); similarly, delayed deposits of employers' contributions to ESIC and PF are also allowable.

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court
524
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
366 ITR 408 · 2014 · High Court
519
citing judgments

An employer's delayed remittance of employees' contributions to provident fund (PF) or Employees' State Insurance (ESI) is deductible if the payment is made before the due date for filing the income tax return under section 139(1), applying the provisions of section 43B and notwithstanding section 36(1)(va).

CIT v. Bharat Hotels Ltd.
410 ITR 417 · 2019 · High Court
486
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI, if paid beyond the due date prescribed by the respective welfare fund statutes, are not allowed as a deduction under the Income Tax Act.

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.

Judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 350/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 349/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 200/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

Shri. Govindaiah N, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 6(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 85/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Meber & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: None
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

M/S. Sujanix Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 103/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Meber & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: None
Section 139(1)Section 234Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S. Sujanix Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 102/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Meber & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: None
Section 139(1)Section 234Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Shreeji Trans Logistics Ltd., Thane vs. CIT (A), CPC, Banglore

In the result, th same. In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee are e grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly dismissed

ITA 388/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Ita No. 388 To 390/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2019-2020 Shreeji Translogistics Ltd., Cit(Appeals), Plot No. 107, Shreeji Krupa, National Faceless Appeal Vs. Sector 19-C, Phase-Ii Vashi, Centre, Thane-400705 Delhi. Pan No. Aaecs 3602 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr. Anil Sant, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/04/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 26/04/2023 Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Anil Sant, DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)

M/S Guruji Infrastruture Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Banglore

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

ITA 343/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.343/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2020-21) M/S. Guruji Infrastructure बिधम/ Adit, Cpc Pvt. Ltd Banglore. Vs. 33, Plot 1088 Suraj Plaza, ‘A’ Wing, Chandulal Park, Station Rd Bhayandar (W), Thane-401101. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecg3499G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Dinkle Hariya Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 19.01.2023 For Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Confirming The Action Of The Cpc Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Disallowing Rs.1,47,39,619/- Claimed Towards Employees Contribution Towards Provident Fund/Esic. 3. Fact In Brief Are That The Assessee Company Had Filed Its Return Of Income On 24.02.2021 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,93,38,870/-. & Thereafter, It Received Intimation Dated 23.012.2021 From Cpc, Bangalore U/S 143(1) Of The Act Wherein An Amount Of Rs.1,47,39,619/- Was Disallowed On Account Of Late Deposit Of Employees Contribution Towards Pf/Esic In The Relevant Funds Within

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariyaFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

The Master Polishers, Mumbai vs. Asst Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 252/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Master Polishers, Assistant Director Of Income S-02, Suchita Chs Ltd., Kalina Tax, Cpc, Bangalore, Vs. Church Cross Road, Santacruz 1St Floor, Prestige Alpha No. East, 48/1 48/2, Mumbai-400029. Beratenaagrahara Begur, Hosur Rd, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru, Karnataka-560 100. Pan No. Aahft 5749 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Sunil Hirawat, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Richa Gulati, Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/04/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 26/04/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Sunil Hirawat, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati, DR
Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

Spick-N-Span Services, Mum vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-41(3)(1) Erstwhile Ward-27(3)(3), Mum

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 14/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.14/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.15/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Spick-N-Span Services बिधम/ Income Tax Officer Ward- 41(3)(1) (Erstwhile 409, 4Th Floor, Sej Plaza, Vs. Marve Road Malad (W) Ward- 27(3)(3) Mumbai- 400064 Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Mumbai- 400051 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaofs2733G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar Das. Sr. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/03/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 16.11.2022 For Ay 2011-12 & Ay 2018-19. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 48,19,696/- For The Ay 2011-12 U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Herein After ‘The Act’) & Rs. 1,48,61,729/- (Ay 2018- 19) U/S 143(1) Of The Act, Both On Account Of Disallowance Of Employees Contribution Of Provident Fund & Esic U/S 36(1) (Va) Of The Act. Since, The Issue

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Das. Sr. AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)

Wanbury Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 109/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No. 109/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Wanbury Limited बिधम / Adit, Cpc 10Th Floor, Section 30- 1St Floor, Prestige Alpha Vs. No 48/1 48/2, A Bsel Tech Park, B Beratenaagrahareabegur, Wing, Opp. Vashi Hosur Rd, Uttarahallihobli, Railway Station, Vashi Bengaluru 560100 Mumbai 400705 स्थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp5939P (अपीलाथी .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) /Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(A)Section 30Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S. Super Tiles & Marbles Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1949/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 1949 & 1950/Mum/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-2020 M/S Super Tiles & Marbles National Faceless Appeal Pvt. Ltd, Centre (Nfac) Vs. 904 Marathon Icon, Opposite Mararshi Karve Road, New Peninsula Corporate Park, Off Marine Lines, Churchgate, Ganapatrao Kadam Marg, Mumbai-400020. Lower Parel-West, Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacs 9361 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Raman Shah, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Richa Gulati, Dr : Date Of Hearing 12/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/04/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Raman Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati, DR
Section 14Section 43B

Patwari Steels Pvt Ltd, Patna vs. Dc/Ac, Circle-2, Patna

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 58/PAT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & 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

Prime Comfort Porducts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-19(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 530/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2020-21

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

M/S. Karnail Singh & Company, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, Jalandhar

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

ITA 26/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 154Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S. Karnail Singh & Company, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, Jalandhar

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

ITA 25/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 154Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Bannari Amman Spinning Mills Limited, Coimbatore vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 1, Coimbatore

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 273/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 43B

S.J.Metal Industries, Mumbai vs. Jao WD 21(3) (2), CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 2013/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhs.J.Metal Industries Vs. Central Processing Centre, Ground Floor, Jain Estate Bangalore, Jakaria Road, Judicial Assessing Officer: Malad (W) Ward 21(3)(2) Mumbai – 400 064 1St Floor, Prestige Apha No. 48/1 48/2, Beratenaagrahara Begur, Hosur Rd, Uttaranhalli Hobli Bengaluru Karnataka – 560100 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aatfs6124J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Bhupendra Shah Respondent By : C.T. Mathews Date Of Hearing 20.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.04.2023

For Appellant: Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: C.T. Mathews
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Sparrow Security Services, Jammu vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Jammu

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

ITA 40/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 250oSection 36Section 43B

Flourtech Engineers Pvt Ltd, Haryana vs. ACIT Circle-1, Haryana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2201/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri C.M Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshflourtech Engiiners Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Plot No.-182, Sector-24, Circle-1, Fardiabad, Haryana 121005 Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacf4904H

For Appellant: Ms. Jaya (Intern)For Respondent: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B