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)

Balaji Motors, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 409/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

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

D.P.Security & Allied Service, Kolkata vs. E-Assessment, Centralized Procesing Center, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 271/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

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

Harenath Singh, Howrah vs. DCIT, CPC, Income Tax Department, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 219/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

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

Shioji Singh HUF, Howrah vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 218/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)

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

Natraj Dal Mill, Indore vs. ACIT 5 (1), Indore

In the result, Appeal of the assessee namely Natraj Dal Mill in

ITA 153/IND/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2019-20 Natraj Dal Mill Acit 5(1) Indore Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No. Aadfn3699P Appellant By Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Respondent By Shri Amit Soni, Sr.Dr Assessment Year:2011-12 Shri Ashok Somani Dy. Cit, Ps, Indore Bangalore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Agtps5575R Appellant By S/Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit Gour, Ars Respondent By Shri Amit Soni, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.12.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad:

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

Shri Ashok Somani, Indore vs. The Dy CIT, Ps, Bangalore

In the result, Appeal of the assessee namely Natraj Dal Mill in

ITA 131/IND/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2019-20 Natraj Dal Mill Acit 5(1) Indore Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No. Aadfn3699P Appellant By Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Respondent By Shri Amit Soni, Sr.Dr Assessment Year:2011-12 Shri Ashok Somani Dy. Cit, Ps, Indore Bangalore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Agtps5575R Appellant By S/Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit Gour, Ars Respondent By Shri Amit Soni, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.12.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad:

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

Kiran Kommercial Watches, Secunderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-10(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 468/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2018-19 Kiran Kommercial Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Watches, Secunderabad, Bangalore. Telangana. Pan : Aadfk0204B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None. Revenue By: Shri Venkata Tejomurthy. Date Of Hearing: 06.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.12.2021 Order Per S.S. Godara : This Assessee’S Appeal For Ay.2018-19 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi’S Order Dated 21.09.2021 In Case No.Itba/ Nfac/S/250/2021-22/1035759350(1) Involving Proceedings Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Venkata Tejomurthy
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

M/S Chill Point Engineers (P) Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CPC/ITO-Ward-3(4), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 282/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Dec 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

The Sirsa Co-Operative Marketing Cum Processing Lc Society, Sirsa vs. DCIT, CPC/ITO-Ward-3, Sirsa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 274/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Dec 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

M/Sohan Bakery, Ambala City vs. DCIT, CPC/ITO-Ward-1, Ambala

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 273/CHANDI/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Dec 2021AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

Blend Colours Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 394/HYD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S.Godara

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Toshnival, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Millennium Outsourcing and Manpower Consulting Private Limited, Panchkula vs. ITO-Ward-5(5), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 270/CHANDI/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Dec 2021AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain,CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

Millennium Outsourcing and Manpower Consulting Private Limited, Panchkula vs. ITO-Ward-5(5), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 269/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Dec 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain,CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

Inder Singh, Jind vs. DCIT/ITO Ward-2, Jind

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 268/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Dec 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar Singla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

M/S. Viroka Technology Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 507/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.R.E.Balasubramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Chetan R., Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

A.N.R Motors Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissione of Income Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 88/ASR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B(1)(b)

A.N.R Motors Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 87/ASR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B(1)(b)

Madan Dyeing & Finishing Factory, Ludhiana vs. Io-Range-VI(4), Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 265/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Nov 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Navneet Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

Mount Victoria Granites Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assesseeis allowed

ITA 557/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Mount Victoria Granites Limited, Vs. Dcit, No.120 Hoodi Apartments, Central Processing Centre, Cunningham Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 052. Pan : Aabcm 1663 P Assessee By : Shri. C. A. Madhukeshwara Hegde, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel For The Department Date Of Hearing : 07.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.12.2021 O R D E R Er N. V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against Order Dated 27.09.2021 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.22,46,814/-. In An Intimation Dated 30.04.2020 Issued U/S.143(1) Of The Act, The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Added A Sum Of Rs. 13,50,284/- 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. C. A. Madhukeshwara Hegde, 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

Burmah Auto Service, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle 4(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 422/HYD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara

For Appellant: Shri Bhupesh Kumar Dand, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Laskar, DR
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B