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)

Delhi Duty Free Services Private Limted, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue in decided as follows:

ITA 69/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 135Section 80Section 80G

Delhi Duty Free Services Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-13, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue in decided as follows:

ITA 68/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 135Section 80Section 80G

Delhi Duty Free Services Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-13, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue in decided as follows:

ITA 67/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 135Section 80Section 80G

Ganganager Vehicles Pvt. Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 991/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pratap Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

Ganganagar Vehicles Pvt. Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-10(1), Delhi

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 990/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pratap Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

Alankit Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-2(2), Delhi

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

ITA 3207/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 115Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

Pawan Kumar Sharma, New Delhi vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Banglore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2509/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Lalchandani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue fails on the sole

ITA 1251/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mukund Rao, AR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41(1)

Pawan Infrahomes Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Vadodara

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

ITA 1134/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 68

Neeraj Kumar Sinha, Jamshedpur vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Jamshedpur

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

ITA 291/RAN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi08 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayneeraj Kumar Sinha, I.T.O., Prop.-M/S Neeraj Engineering, Chota Ward-1(1), Vs. Ghamaria, Saraikela-Kharsawan, Jamshedpur. Jamshedpur-832108 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Bopps 2885 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154

DCIT, Bhilai vs. Jilla Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Rajnandgaon

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 1/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Dhody, CAFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

Nimbeshwar Gudadram Desai, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1) (Previously Circle-3(3)), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1436/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 36(1)Section 40

Vishal Furnishing Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4550/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Vishal Furnishing Limited Assistant Commissioner Of Income 211, Shiv Shakti Industrial Complex, Tax, Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai. Vs. Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400011. Pan/Gir No. Aaacr2138K (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rahul Hakkani Respondent By : Shri Vivek Perampurna (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.10.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1) The Learned Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Assessment Order Was Passed In Violation Of The Principles Of Natural Justice & Contrary To The Scheme Of Assessment & Hence The Assessment Order Was A Nullity & Deserves To Be Quashed. 2) The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Order Of Ao Disallowing Depreciation On Goodwill Of Rs 4,12,73,088/- (As Claimed In Accounts) Without Appreciating That Goodwill Had Arisen On Amalgamation & Was Eligible For Depreciation U/S 32 & Hence The Addition Of Rs 4,12,73,088/-May Be Deleted. Vishal Furnishing Limited

For Appellant: Shri Rahul HakkaniFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT DR)
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 32Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Surendra Devid Thokal, Aurangabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(5), Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1173/PUN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1173/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Surendra Devid Thokal, V The Income Tax Officer, B14, Thokal Niwas, Chawni, S Ward-1(5), Aurangabad. Aurangabad – 431001. Pan: Aehpt3043B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Smt. Sonall Sonkavde – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 29/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Noida Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2018-19 Dated 03.01.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(1) Of The Act, Dated 09.01.2020. 2. At The Outset Of Hearing, No One Attended On Behalf Of The Assessee. No Written Submission Or Adjournment Letter Was Filed.

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

DCIT Central Circle, 1(4), Kolkata vs. Jupiter International Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 852/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 852/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,….…Appellant Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Jupiter International Limited,…………….…Respondent Unnayanam, 20A, Ashutosh Chowdhury Avenue, Kolkata-700019, West Bengal [Pan:Aaacj6956B] Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Advocate & Shri K.K. Chhaparia, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.N. Barnwal, Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 07, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 30, 2025 O R D E R

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Sheth Realtors, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4008/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Sheth Realtors Income-Tax Officer-7(1) Vasant Oasis, Site Office, [Erstwhile Ito-23(3)(3)] Upper Basement, Mumbai Cts No 345A 1 To 3, Vs. 345A 5 To 6, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri East., Mumbai – 400059 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Sheth Realtors Income-Tax, Central Circle 12Th Floor, Hallmark Business 7(1), Vs. Plaza, Sant Dyaneshwar Marg Mumbai Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Advocate & Shri Rahul Hakani, Advocate Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Filed By Assessee & Revenue Are Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) 49, Mumbai, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024- Assessment Year 2017-18 25/1075205796(1), Dated 28.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income-Tax Officer, Ward-23(3)(3), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 30.12.2019 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee & Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: I. Ita No. 2712/Mum/2025 [Assessee]

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Advocate and Shri Rahul Hakani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)

Sheth Realtors, Mumbai vs. ITO-7(1) (Erstwhile ITO-23(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2712/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Sheth Realtors Income-Tax Officer-7(1) Vasant Oasis, Site Office, [Erstwhile Ito-23(3)(3)] Upper Basement, Mumbai Cts No 345A 1 To 3, Vs. 345A 5 To 6, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri East., Mumbai – 400059 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Sheth Realtors Income-Tax, Central Circle 12Th Floor, Hallmark Business 7(1), Vs. Plaza, Sant Dyaneshwar Marg Mumbai Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Advocate & Shri Rahul Hakani, Advocate Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Filed By Assessee & Revenue Are Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) 49, Mumbai, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024- Assessment Year 2017-18 25/1075205796(1), Dated 28.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income-Tax Officer, Ward-23(3)(3), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 30.12.2019 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee & Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: I. Ita No. 2712/Mum/2025 [Assessee]

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Advocate and Shri Rahul Hakani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1504/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B Before Dr. B.R.R. Kumar Kumar, , , , Vice Vice-Before Before Dr. B Dr. B Kumar Kumar Viceshri Siddhartha Nautiyal Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalshri Siddhartha Nautiyal Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalcheckmate Services Pvt. Ltd., Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. 1115 To 1120, 73 East Avenue, Income-Tax, Sarabhai Campus, Near Genda Circle 1(1)(1), Circle, Vadodara-390023 Vadodara [Pan :Aaacc 8465 A] (Appellant Appellant Appellant) Appellant .. (Respondent Respondent Respondent) Respondent Appellant By : Appellant By : Ms. Kinjal V. Shah, Ar Appellant By : Appellant By : Respondent By: Respondent By Shri R.P. Rastogi, Cit-Dr Respondent By Respondent By Date Of Hearing Date Of Hearing Date Of Hearing Date Of Hearing 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement Date Of Pronouncement Date Of Pronouncement Date Of Pronouncement 29.09.2025

For Appellant: Appellant byFor Respondent: Respondent by Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 26ASection 36(1)(va)

Indocare Infrastructure Private Limited, Delhi vs. Ward 12(1), Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4750/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

Siyaram City Cabs Ltd., Jaipur vs. Itd Ward 6(4), Jaipur

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

ITA 661/JPR/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(5)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 40