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)

Global Green Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1931/DEL/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2002-03

Section 37(1)

M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutions Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1154/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarishri Panati Vidyanath Reddy Vs Acit, Circle - 4(3)(1) 10, 32Nd Main, 5Th Cross Bengaluru Dollars Colony, Btm Layout 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Afmpr3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutsions P. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle - 3(1)(1) 26, 9Th Cross, 16Th Main Bengaluru Btm Layout, 1St Stage Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Aadcn1064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M.

For Appellant: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36Section 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

Sri Panati Vidyanath Reddy, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1148/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarishri Panati Vidyanath Reddy Vs Acit, Circle - 4(3)(1) 10, 32Nd Main, 5Th Cross Bengaluru Dollars Colony, Btm Layout 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Afmpr3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutsions P. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle - 3(1)(1) 26, 9Th Cross, 16Th Main Bengaluru Btm Layout, 1St Stage Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Aadcn1064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M.

For Appellant: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)

Subramanya Karthik, Bhadravathi vs. ITO, Ward- 1 & Tps, Shimoga

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

ITA 1142/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri I. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

Blue Circle Organics Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Natinal E- Assessment Centre, Delhi, Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2114/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2023AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Haresh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 35Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Sri. P. Harshavardhana Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1016/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri, S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

The Malad Sahakari Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT CPC, Bangalore

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1796/MUM/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm The Malad Sahakari Bank Adit Cpc Limited,6, Sujata Niketan, Rani Bangalore, Sati Marg, Malad (E), Vs. Karnataka-560 500 Mumbai 400 097 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaat0320R Assessee By : Shri Vipul Joshi/Ms. Dinkal Hariya Revenue By : Shri S.K.Jain (Sr Ar) Date Of Hearing: 20.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement : 17.01.2023. O R D E R

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri S.K.Jain (SR AR)
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 37(1)Section 43B

Fil India Business & Research Services P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Dc, Circle-7(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1358/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Chandra Mohan Gargfil India Business & Vs. Dc Research Services P. Ltd., Circle – 7(1) Private Studio – New Delhi Ncr/Ac/Ps/00/010B, Ground Floor, Worldmark 1, Asset Area 11, Aerocity, Hospitality District, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi-110 002 Pan : Aabcf 1572 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri K. M. Gupta, Adv. Shri Rishabh Malhotra, A.R. & Shri Bhavya Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Shri Amaresh Singh, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.01.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am :

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(2)Section 144C(5)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

Adecco India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITTPA 998/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.998/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Vs. Dcit, M/S. Adecco India Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(1), B-9 13Th Floor, Brigade Metropolis, Bengaluru. Itpl Main Road, Garudachar Palya, Mahadevapura, Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan : Aabcg 3636 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Srinivas K. P, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sreenivas T Bidari, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 04.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.01.2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivas K. P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sreenivas T Bidari, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 154Section 92Section 92D

Sri. Ramdurg Channa Basavana Goud, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1107/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jan 2023AY 2020-21

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

Bharath Industrial Corporation, Bangalore vs. ACIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1046/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jan 2023AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri AbhijeetFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel (DR.)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B