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 Natural Products Export Corpn. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3446/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No: 3446/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Natural Products Export Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Corporation Limited, Tax, No. 53-A, Mirza Galib Street, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Kolkata – 700 016. Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aabcn 0454B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : None ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.04.2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.07.2021

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. G. Johnson, Addl. CIT

Indo States Exports, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-28(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1892/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2018-19 Indo States Exports, Vs Acit, E-6, Kalindi Colony, Circle-28(1), New Delhi-110065. New Delhi. Pan-Aaafi1883M Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, Ca Respondent By Sh. R.K.Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 30.06.2021

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Maksat Technologies (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-16(1), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1540/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Maksat Technologies Pvt Ltd, Vs. Dcit, E-13, Ground Floor, Block No. B-1, Circle-16(1), Mohan Cooperative Estate, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaccm7831L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri I. P. Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sohil Malik, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 32

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Adecco India Pvt. Ltd

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue fails and

ITA/1053/2017HC Karnataka29 Jun 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 2(24)(x)Section 260Section 260A

Prasad Media Corporation Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 67/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jun 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing) M/S. Prasad Media Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Pan Aaccp1745N …..Appellant. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 14(1), Hyderabad. ..Respondent. Appellant By : None. Respondent By : Shri Rohit Majumdar (D.R) Date Of Hearing : 10.05.2021. Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2021. O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, A.M. : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 6, Hyderabad Dt.22.11.2019 Passed In Case No.10008/2019-20/Cit(A)-6 On The Following Effective Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Majumdar (D.R)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S. Krishnae Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Pune vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax -6, Pune

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

ITA 427/PUN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.427/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Krishnae Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 94A, Sangita Smriti, N T Wadi, Shivajinagar, Pune-411005. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaeck1307M बनाम / V/S. Pr.Cit-6, ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Deepak Garg सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22.06.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Validity Of The Order Passed By The Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, Pune (‘The Pcit’) Dated 12.03.2020 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’). 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Has Erred In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 & Passing The Order U/S.263 Which Is Without Jurisdiction & Ab Initio Bad In Law. Appellant Prays To Cancel The Same. 2. Pr. Cit Erred In Setting Aside The Order U/S. 143(3) By Stating That No Verification Was Made By A.O. Regarding Payment Of Employee’S Contribution To Pf/Esic Of Rs.10,71,494/-. However, A) Order U/S. 143(3) Is Limited Scrutiny, Not On This Issue. B) Supreme Court & Bombay High Court Held Employees Payment Before Due Date Of Filing Are Allowable. Appellant Prays To Cancel The Order Passed By Pr. Cit. 3. Appellant Prays To Add, Alter, Amend & / Or Withdraw The Ground/S As The Occasion May Demand During Appellate Proceedings.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

HUF India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 9, Pune

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 224/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 224/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Huf India Pvt. Ltd. Gat No.304, Nanekarwadi, Chakan, Tal- Khed, Pune-410 501 Pan : Aabch9173K .......अपीलाथी / Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Aaditya DastaneFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 143(3)Section 35DSection 35D(2)Section 36(1)(va)

Savani Heritage Conservation Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1956/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

DCIT 14 (2) (1), Mumbai vs. Positive Packaging Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result grounds raised by the revenue in this regard are dismissed

ITA 4103/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Bhaumik Goda, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, DR
Section 115Section 143Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 43B

Azamgarh Steel & Power Private Limited, New Delhi vs. CPC, Banglore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1626/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Azamgarh Steel & Power Vs. Cpc Pvt. Ltd., Banglore 505, Dda Building, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi, Delhi-110092 Pan No. Aaica 4658 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ved Jain Advocate Shri Ashish Goel, C.A. Revenue By Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 12/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 09.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, New Delhi Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

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

V Green Furnitures and Fixtures, Hyderabad vs. ITO- Ward7(2), Hyderabad

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 138/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 May 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi

For Appellant: Sri Ravindra Chengi, A.RFor Respondent: Sri E. Sridhar, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Anjali Devi Majeti, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(3), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 95/HYD/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 May 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Deviassessment Year:2018-19

For Appellant: Sri Tarak NathFor Respondent: Sri Rajat Mishra, DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Omkara Impex and Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1762/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) [Through Virtual Court]

For Appellant: Shri P.B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 234ASection 271Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

Suryauday Spinning Mills Private Limited, Secunderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 157/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 May 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi

For Appellant: Sri Sidharth Toshnival, AdvFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey, D.R
Section 143Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Unison Insurance Broking Services Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 912/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Apr 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 194ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40

DCIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai vs. Talentpro India Hr. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 265/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 265/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Talentpro India Hr Pvt. Ltd., New No. 64, Old No. 30, 3Rd Floor, Income Tax, Vs. Corporate Circle 3(1), Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 008. [Pan:Aabcp9823A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Sanjeev Aditya, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.03.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 7, Chennai Dated 25.10.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Made Towards Belated Remittance Of Employees’ Contribution Of Pf & Esi, Which Was Disallowed Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Has Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2014-15 On 26.09.2014 Admitting Total

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri M. Sanjeev Aditya, C.A
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Soni Hospitals Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 756/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: None (written submission)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jt. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

DCIT, Circle- 3(2), New Delhi vs. Azure Switchgear Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6221/DEL/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambledr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6221/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Acit, Vs Azure Switchgear Pvt. Ltd., 109, 1St Floor, Hans Bhawan, Circle-3(2), New Delhi-110002 Wing-Ii, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahca2141E

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. V. K. Kataria, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68Section 80I

Zenitex, Surat vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 226/SRT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.147 & 234/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2018-19 To 2019-20) (Virtual Court Hearing) Rekha R. Shokla, Vs. The Dcit, Cpc, G-3, Deepanjali Appartment, Sai Bangalore. Krupa Society, No.4-Airport Road, Nani Daman. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bgyps2563M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.150/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, Cpc, 75-1 & 75-2, Gidc, Pandesara, Bangalore. Surat-394221, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr7050C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.160/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20) Chinco Textiles, Vs. The Acit, Cpc, Plot No.104, Road No.7, Gidc Bangalore. Sachin, Surat-394230. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefc0028N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.201 & 202/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2018-19 To 2019-20) Shree Laxminarayan Synthetics, Vs. The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), Plot No.275/2, Gidc, Pandesara, Surat. Surat, Gujarat-394221. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakfs5319N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.224 & 225/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19 To 2019-20) Tirupati Prints, Vs. The Adit, Cpc, S. No.207, Plot No.37 To 40, Bangalore. Bamroli Taluka: Choryasi, Surat-394221, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabft4240J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 36

Laxminarayan Synthetics, Surat vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(1)(1), Surat

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

ITA 201/SRT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.147 & 234/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2018-19 To 2019-20) (Virtual Court Hearing) Rekha R. Shokla, Vs. The Dcit, Cpc, G-3, Deepanjali Appartment, Sai Bangalore. Krupa Society, No.4-Airport Road, Nani Daman. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bgyps2563M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.150/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) Riddhi Siddhi Prints Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, Cpc, 75-1 & 75-2, Gidc, Pandesara, Bangalore. Surat-394221, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr7050C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.160/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20) Chinco Textiles, Vs. The Acit, Cpc, Plot No.104, Road No.7, Gidc Bangalore. Sachin, Surat-394230. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefc0028N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.201 & 202/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2018-19 To 2019-20) Shree Laxminarayan Synthetics, Vs. The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), Plot No.275/2, Gidc, Pandesara, Surat. Surat, Gujarat-394221. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakfs5319N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.224 & 225/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19 To 2019-20) Tirupati Prints, Vs. The Adit, Cpc, S. No.207, Plot No.37 To 40, Bangalore. Bamroli Taluka: Choryasi, Surat-394221, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabft4240J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 36