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)

Saalim Shoes Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both assessment years are allowed

ITA 1525/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1525 & 1526/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2013-14) M/S. Saalim Shoes Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of 4/2, 2Nd Floor, Atkinson Place, Income Tax, Venkatachalamsalai, Vepery, Corporate Circle-6(1) Chennai-600 007. Chennai-600 034. Pan: Aajcs 9889B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. R.Anita, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 21.12.2021
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36

Vidhi Clothing Company, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 424/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sankarganesh K, JCIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

The Jabo Majro Co-Operative Labour and Construction Society Ltd., Malerkotla vs. ITO, Malerkotla

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

ITA 361/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Atul Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Bi Worldwide India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 433/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri C.R Krishna, CA
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Senator Travels Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Itd, CPC, Bengalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 327/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Senator Travels Pvt.Ltd., Vs Itd, 2K, Dcm Building, 16, Cpc, Barakhamba Road, Bengalore. New Delhi-110001. Pan-Aabcs2702B Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 04.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 04.01.2022

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Genworks Health Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 469/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri K.R Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT (DR)
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 6

Active Group Securitas, New Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1287/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

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

Active Group Securitas, New Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1286/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

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

Sugandh, Moradabad vs. Itd, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1259/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Sugandh, Vs Itd, Jawahar Market, G.M.D.Road, Cpc, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh-244001. Bengaluru. Pan-Aaefs7109J Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 30.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 30.12.2021

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

Excel Phosphates Private Limited, Meerut vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1258/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Excel Phosphates Pvt.Ltd., Vs Adit, 195-196, Shatabdi Nagar, Delhi Cpc, Road, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh-250103 Bengaluru. Pan-Aacce3927B Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 30.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 30.12.2021

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Dinesh Chandra Semwal, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 28(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 21/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat

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

M/S. Vijay Samraj Hotels Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 504/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Vijay Samraj Hotels P. The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner Of No. 18, 3Rd Main Road, Income Tax, Gandhinagar, Cpc, Bangalore – 560 009. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aabcv4731B Appellant Respondent Shri S.V. Ravishankar, Assessee By : Advocate & Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Ca : Shri Raghavendra Rao, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 01-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-12-2021 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.07.2021 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Impugned Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Bengaluru Karnataka Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case.

For Appellant: Advocate & Ms. Sunaina
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Abhay Shrivastva, Faridabad vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengalurur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1289/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Abhay Shrivastva, Vs Dcit, 501, Sears Vth Floor, Sector-86, Cpc, Faridabad, Haryana-121007. Bengaluru. Pan-Bgjps08499B Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Gurjit Singh, Ca Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 28.12.2021

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

Tml Business Serices Ltd. (Earlier Known As Concorde Motors (India) Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, CPC, Bangalore

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 931/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Dec 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy (Jm) & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Am)

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

Shand Pipe Industry Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (CPC), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 412/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri H Ananda, Addl.CIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234BSection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Kuduma Labour Contract, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 4(3)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 643/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Kuduma Labour Contract, Vs. Ito, No.69/1, 35Th Main, 7Th Cross, Ward – 4(3)(2), Btm Layout 2Nd Stage, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 068. Pan : Aajfk 5289 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Rajashekar, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel For The Department Date Of Hearing : 23.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2021 O R D E R Er N. V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against Order Dated 23.09.2021 Of Cit(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Is A Company. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For Ay 2019-20 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,71,810/-. In An Intimation Dated 22.02.2020 Issued U/S.143(1) Of The Act, The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Added A Sum Of Rs.14,77,428/- Representing Employees’ Share Of Contribution To Esi To The Extent Not Paid On Or Before The Due Date As Mentioned In Sec 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act 1961. 3. It Was The Case Of The Assessee That Employees’ Share Of Esi Has Been Paid Before The Due Date For Filing Of Return U/S.139(1) Of The Act (This Fact Is Not In Dispute) & Hence Has Been Considered Allowable On The Basis Of Page 2 Of 6

For Appellant: Shri. Rajashekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for the Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S. Anubis Detective & Guarding Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(2) Through the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 632/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Anubis Detective & Guarding Vs. Ito, Services Private Limited, Ward – 1(1)(2) Through No.37, 1St Floor, 9Th B Cross, Dcit, Wilson Garden, Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru – 560 027. Bengaluru. Pan : Aafca 4501 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel For The Department Date Of Hearing : 23.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2021 O R D E R Er N. V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against Order Dated 24.09.2021 Of Cit(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For Ay 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.7,53,696/-. In An Intimation Dated 16.10.2019 Issued U/S.143(1) Of The Act, The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Added A Sum Of Rs. 12,50,435/- Representing Employees’ Share Of Contribution To Esi To The Extent Not Paid On Or Before The Due Date As Mentioned In Sec 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act 1961. 3. It Was The Case Of The Assessee That Employees’ Share Of Esi Has Been Paid Before The Due Date For Filing Of Return U/S.139(1) Of The Act (This Fact Is Not In Dispute) & Hence Has Been Considered Allowable On The Basis Of Page 2 Of 6

For Appellant: Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for the Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S. Methods (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 626/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Methods (India) Private Limited, Vs. 1. Dcit, #4A, Kiadb Industrial Area, Circle – 4(1)(2), Hosakote Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 562 114. Pan : Aabcm 8680 N 2. Cpc, Bengaluru. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel For The Department Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2021 O R D E R Er N. V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against Order Dated 12.11.2021 Of Cit(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For Ay 2019-20 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.Nil. In An Intimation Dated 29.06.2020 Issued U/S.143(1) Of The Act, The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Added A Sum Of Rs. 46,87,690/- Representing Employees’ Share Of Contribution To Esi To The Extent Not Paid On Or Before The Due Date As Mentioned In Sec 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act 1961. 3. It Was The Case Of The Assessee That Employees’ Share Of Esi Has Been Paid Before The Due Date For Filing Of Return U/S.139(1) Of The Act (This Fact Is Not In Dispute) & Hence Has Been Considered Allowable On The Basis Of Page 2 Of 6

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for the Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

B R S Precision Manufacturing Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 620/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. B. R. S. Precision Manufacturing Vs. Dcit, Private Limited, Central Processing Centre, No.19, 5Th Floor, Shivashankar Plaza, Bengaluru. Richmond Circle, Lalbagh Road, Bengaluru – 560 027. Pan : Aaecb 5550 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel For The Department Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2021 O R D E R Er N. V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against Order Dated 23.09.2021 Of Cit(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For Ay 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.Nil. In An Intimation Dated 16.10.2019 Issued U/S.143(1) Of The Act, The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Added A Sum Of Rs. 11,81,345/- Representing Employees’ Share Of Contribution To Esi To The Extent Not Paid On Or Before The Due Date As Mentioned In Sec 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act 1961. 3. It Was The Case Of The Assessee That Employees’ Share Of Esi Has Been Paid Before The Due Date For Filing Of Return U/S.139(1) Of The Act (This Fact Is Not In Dispute) & Hence Has Been Considered Allowable On The Basis Of Page 2 Of 6

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for the Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Mr. Rais Arif Meman, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 430/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Ravi Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B