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)

M/S. Daxer Trading Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 565/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Shrenik Chordia, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.R Narayan, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Charan Satpal Anand, Pune vs. Asst. DIT, CPC, Banglore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA No

ITA 582/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

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

Shree Balaji Associates Pune LLP, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA No

ITA 580/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

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

Glazium Facades P Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA No

ITA 565/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

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

Glazium Facades P Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA No

ITA 564/PUN/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

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

Kalokhe Stone Crusher, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA No

ITA 563/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

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

Dar A1 Handasah Consultants (Shir & Partners) India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, ground No. 2 of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 555/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 234BSection 234CSection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Inspectorate Griffith India Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 141/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.141/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Inspectorate Griffith India Private Limited..........................................……Appellant Eco-Centre, 16Th Floor, Unit-1601, Block-Em04, Salt Lake City, Sector-V, Bidhannagar, North 24 Pgs, Kolkata- 700091. [Pan: Aabci0315E] Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bangalore .......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Indra, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 27, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 27, 2022 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That Cit (Nfac) Has Materially Erred In Law & Facets Of The Case In Disallowing Rs.22,94,560/- In Respect Of Esi & Pf Which Have Been Paid Before The Due Date Of Filing Income Tax Return. 2. For That Cit (Nfac) Has Materially Erred In Understanding Of The Applicability Of The Amended Explanations To Section 36(1)(Vb) & 43B As Introduced In The Finance Act 2021 Which Is Applicable In Prospective Assessment Year & Same Is Not At All Applicable In The Relevant Assessment Year I.E. Assessment Year 2017-18. 3. For That Assessee Reserves Its Right To Put Forth Further Ground/Grounds Of Appeal Before / At The Time Of Hearing.”

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(vb)Section 43B

Sasanur Hospital, Vijaypur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee as well as the appeal of revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 415/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Mandur, C.A by RevenueFor Respondent: Shri Vilas Shinde, CIT (DR) by
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

Sh Avinash Mahadev Ranade, Ichalkaranji vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA No

ITA 541/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

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

Mohite Electronics P Ltdq, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA No

ITA 533/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Roao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

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

Enmas India Private Limited, Tiruvallur vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 714/CHNY/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.714/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020 -21 M/S. Enmas India Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Sp 107, Eom Square Ambattur, Vs. Income Tax, Ambattur Indl. Estate S.O., Tiruvallur, Cpc, Bengaluru 560 500. Tamil Nadu 600 058. [Pan:Aabce4825F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Zakir Hussain, C.A. & Shri Sriraj Gokavarapu, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 03.08.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2020-21 On 16.12.2020 Declaring The Total Income At ₹.4,77,23,830/-. The Cpc, Bengaluru Has Completed The 2

For Appellant: Shri Zakir Hussain, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

M/S, Madras Hydraulic Hose Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 702/CHNY/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singhand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S Bab Leather Products International, Thirumudivakkam vs. DCIT, Chenai

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

ITA 665/CHNY/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.665/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Bab Leather Products The Deputy Commissioner Of International, 162/163, Sidco Vs. Income Tax, Industrial Estate, Thirumudivakkam, Non Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai 600 044. Chennai. [Pan:Aaafb6228M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Tarun, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 28.07.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2015-16 On 23.09.2015 Declaring The Total Income At ₹.54,09,150/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 43B

Kalpanadevi, Pondicherry vs. ADIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 664/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.664/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Kalpanadevi, The Assistant Director Of 34, Koil Mania Street, Vs. Income Tax, Dharmapuri, Pondicherry 605 009. Cpc, Bengaluru 560 500. [Pan:Csjpk5198N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K. N. Dhandapani, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 10.06.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2019-20 Declaring The Total Income At ₹.14,89,000/-. The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Processed Under 2

For Appellant: Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. N. Dhandapani, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 43B

Late Mr.Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj Rep by Legal Heir - Mr.Shankar Ganesh, Chennai vs. CPC, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 661/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singhand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Late Mr.Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj Rep by Legal Heir - Mr.Shankar Ganesh, Chennai vs. CPC, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 660/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singhand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S Maxima Automation Solutions Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp Circle 4 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 649/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.649/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Maxima Automation Solutions Pvt. Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., Represented By Its Managing Income Tax, Director, No. 2/87, Raghaava Nagar, Corporate Circle 4(1), 7Th Street, Moovarasampet, Chennai Madipakkam, Chennai 600 091. [Pan:Aagcm1970L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P. James Victor Rajkumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 25.05.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By Eight Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal, For Which, The Assessee Has Filed A 2

For Appellant: Shri P. James Victor RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

Shri Aseen Jindal, Bhopal vs. The ADIT-CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 204/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Indore22 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Aseem Jindal Adit-Cpc Bhopal Bengaluru Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Afgpj 5199 C Assessee By Ms. Shraddha Piplodiya, Adv. Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2022 O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Eknath Dhondiram Mithe, Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 502/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.502/Pun/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B