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)

Aditya Shankar Choudhari, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Pune

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 333/PUN/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Pun/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Aditya Shankar Vs Ito Ward Choudhari, 10(1), Akurdi, House No. 125/2, Hill Pune Range, Phase 4, Deolali Camp-422401 Maharashtra Pan-Afopc0286M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 35(1)(va)Section 36(1)(V)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

Dharrit Shah, Pune vs. ACIT Cir-6 Pune, Pune

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

ITA 2260/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2260/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Vishal A. Makawane
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 41(1)Section 69C

Seema Sunil Bagul, Nashik vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Nashik.

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

ITA 1648/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

Seema Sunil Bagul, Nashik vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Nashik.

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

ITA 1647/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

Seema Sunil Bagul, Nashik vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Nashik.

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

ITA 1646/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

M/S Novel Sugar Ltd, Kanpur vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 27/LKW/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Mar 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharym/S. Novel Sugar Ltd Dcit, Centralized V. 123/355, Fazalganj, Kanpur- Processing Centre, 208012. Bangaluru. Pan:Aaccb2480N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Kantar Gdc India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle - 2(1), Hyderabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 804/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 156

Kantar Gdc India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle - 2(1), Hyderabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 274/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 156

Mohammed Sabirul Islam, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer 43(1)Kol, Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1206/KOL/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No. 1206/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Mohammed Sabirul Islam,………………...……Appellant 19B/3, Dumdum Road, Near Tank No. 7, Kolkata-700030, West Bengal [Pan:Aaspi4453M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………....Respondent Ward-43(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Amuldeep Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: February 03, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: March 18, 2025

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Raunaq Epc International Limited, K.M Mathura Road Faridabaad vs. PCIT(Central), Delhi-1, C.R.Building Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1559/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. M. K. Madan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(va)

Spb Projects and Consultancy Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO Corp. Ward 6(1), Chennai

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

ITA 3303/CHNY/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri N.R.Suresh, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 201Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 43B

Sbw Udyog Limited, Prayagraj vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 27/ALLD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh.Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.2021-22 Sbw Udyog Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 44, Thornhill Road, Prayagraj Tax, Circle-1, Prayagraj Pan:Aadcs2883B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. N.C. Agrawal, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 13 .03.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 31.01.2024, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Cpc Bengaluru, Under Section, 143(1) Dated 17.10.2022. Subsequently, The Said Appeal Was Migrated To The Nfac & Later On, The Appeal Proceedings Were Transferred To The Additional / Jcit(A), Aurangabad, Who Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because, Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India Has Observed In The Notice Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Which Reads As Under:- "The Income Tax Department Recognizes & Is Sensitive To The Hardships Being Faced By Taxpayers In Coping With The Challenges Posed By Covid-19 Pandemic." Consequently, Appeal Is Liable To Be Allowed.

For Appellant: Sh. N.C. Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S.Aaryavart Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1) Presently Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 219/AHD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.219/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Aaryavart Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Dy.Cit बनाम/ Ff – 17/A, Pariseema Complex Circle-1(1)(1) V/S. C.G. Road Presently Cen. Cir.1(3) Navrangpura Ahmedabad Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aadca 4844 Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Aseem Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 30.03.2022, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Whereby The Cit(A) Has Confirmed The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”] Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”]. Aaryavart Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit Asst. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 40Section 68

Selvan Nirmala, Salem vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur

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

ITA 3109/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3109/Chny/2024 ननिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Selvan Nirmala, Acit Shop No.6, Dddc Building, V. Circle -1, Sub-Jail Road, Maruthi Nagar, Krishnagiri- 636 007. Hosur – 635 109. [Pan: Aeapn-6574-Q] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S. Bhupendran, Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025

For Appellant: Mr. S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4611/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Dr. K. R. Subhash
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 43B

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4610/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Dr. K. R. Subhash
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 43B

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4609/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Dr. K. R. Subhash
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 43B

Amenity Appliances Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 668/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward 10(2) Amenity Appliances Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan P-7, 181, Dumdum Road, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700074 Vs. Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaica4412D Assessee By : Shri Vidhi Ladia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subhro Das, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Vidhi Ladia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhro Das, DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)(va)

Venkata Satya Lakshmi Kantha Rao Grandhi, Guntur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 93/VIZ/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.93/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2021-22) Venkata Satya Lakshmi Kantha Rao V. Dcit, Grandhi, Circle-1(1), Guntur. Guntur. [Pan: Aatpn3851F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234CSection 36(1)(va)

Gsa Surgical & Medicines Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-6(2), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1174/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 194JSection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40