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)

Memsaheb Exclusive, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officers, Ward -11(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 414/HYD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

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

Sahrudaya Health Care (Karimnagar) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 662/HYD/2020[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi ModiFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 265Section 43BSection 44A

Sahrudaya Health Care (Karimnagar) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 661/HYD/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi ModiFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 265Section 43BSection 44A

Maxx Solutions, Gurgaon vs. CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1032/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2019-20 Maxx Solutions, Vs. Cpc, 958-960, Tower Bi, Bengaluru. 9Th Floor, Sapaze It Park, Sohna Road, Sector-49, Gurgaon. Pan: Aavfm7455N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd July, 2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 26Th October, 2019 Declaring Total Income At Rs.18,50,524/-. The Return Was Processed By The Cpc, Bangalore U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 06.03.2020 Wherein Disallowance Of Rs.5,78,203/- Was Made As Per Provisions Of Section 36(1)(Va) On Account Of Delayed Payment Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf & Esi. In Appeal, The Ld.Cit(A), Relying On Various Decisions, Upheld The Action Of The Ao. 3. Aggrieved With Such Order Of The Cit(A), The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal By Raising The Following Grounds:- “ The Ld. Cit(A) Was Wrong In Confirming Addition Of Rs.5,78,203/- U/S 36(1)(Va) Of The It Act, 1961 Without Any Base.”

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)

Northern India Trading Co, New Delhi vs. Dcitcpc, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1956/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2018-19 Northern India Trading Co., Vs. Dcit, C/O Ssar & Associates, Ca, Cpc, 4852/24, Ff Ansari Road, Bengaluru. Near Sanjivan Hospital, Daryaganj, New Delhi. Pan: Aahfn1944R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sachin Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2021 Order

For Appellant: Shri Sachin Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)

Econ, Ghaziabad vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, these appeals filed by the two assessees are allowed

ITA 1086/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, SR DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2(24)Section 36Section 43Section 43B

Shri Bhuvnesh Kumar Kabra, Bhopal vs. DCIT/ACIT 2 (1) Bhopal, Bhopal

In the result, Appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 96/IND/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2017-18 Shri Bhuvnesh Dcit/Acit 2(1) Bhopal Kumar Kabra बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aebpk8409E Revenue By Shri Arpit Mundra, Ar Respondent By Shri Amit Soni, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.11.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal At The Instance Of Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), (In Short ‘Cit(A)’), Bhopal Dated 05.03.2021 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act 1961(In Bhuvnesh Kumar Kabra Short The ‘Act’) Dated 21.05.2019 Framed By The Assessing Officer Of Cpc Bangalore.

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(X)Section 36(1)(va)

Placebo Gears and Transmissions, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officers, Ward-11(5), Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 427/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sri S. Phanindra (A.R.)For Respondent: Sri T. Sunil Goutam (D.R.)
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Chak Rader Farm Equipments Private Limited, Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 374/HYD/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Nov 2021AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2019-20 Chak Rader Farm Vs. Dcit, Circle 1(2), Equipments Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan : Aabcc5121G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Kiran Manohar. Revenue By: Smt. Matta Padma. Date Of Hearing: 08.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2021 O R D E R Per S.S. Godara : This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y.2019-20 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi’S Order Dated 05.08.2021 In Case No.Itba/ Nfac/S/250/2021-22/1034648788(1) Involving Proceedings Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri Kiran ManoharFor Respondent: Smt. Matta Padma
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36Section 43B

Pachouli Wellness Clinic LLP, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 23(3), New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 999/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 154Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Naveen Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Gurgaon

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1011/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 154Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Global Groupware Solutions Limited, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(1), New Delhi, C. R. Building, I. P. Estate, New Delhi-110002

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1000/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 154Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

ACIT, CC- 3, New Delhi vs. Jotindra Steel & Tubes Ltd., Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4400/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 4400/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Jotindra Steel & Tubes Ltd., Central Circle-3, 14/3, Mathura Road, Meerut Village- Mewla Maharajpur, Faridaba-121003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj1872C Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Shivani Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.11.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)

Jai Enterprises, Jaipur vs. DCIT, CPC Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 248/JPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri R.C. Shah (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S. Shalimar Agarbatti Company, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-2(2)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 485/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Smt.Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 36Section 43B

M/S. Shalimar Agarbatti Company, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-2(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 484/BANG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2021AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Smt.Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 36Section 43B

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi vs. Peregrine Guarding Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 5968/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2014-15 Addl. Cit, Vs Peregrine Guarding Pvt.Ltd., Special Range-7, Rz-1B, Kapashera Crossing, New Delhi. New Delhi-110037. Pan-Aadcp2498P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. I P S Bindra, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. Ajay Mangotia, Adv. Date Of Hearing 20.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 24.11.2021

Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(X)Section 37(1)

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sheela Foam Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3213/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. /, Sh. Arpit Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Munesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 80I

M/S Luthra Industrial Corporation, Agra vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

ITA 48/AGR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenalt.A No. 48/Agr/2021 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S. Luthra Industrial Corporation Vs. | Juridictional Assessinng Officer Circle -1(1)(1), B-1, Site-B, Industrial Area Agra U.P. Sikandra, Agra U.P. 282007 Pan: Aabfl2405P (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

Uv Garments (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1955/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Uv Garments (P.) Ltd., Vs Dcit, C/O-Ssar & Associates, Ca, 4852/24, Cpc, Ff, Ansari Road, Near Sanjivan Hospital, Bengaluru. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aaacu8398Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sachin Jain, Ca Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 23.11.2021

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A