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)

Goodwill Tea & Industries Limited, Jalpaiguri, West Bengal vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Jalpaiguri

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 682/KOL/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21 Goodwill Tea & Industries Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Dinbazar, Jalpaiguri Jalpaiguri West Bengal-735101 [Pan: Aabcg1511G] Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Amber Singh Walia, Ar Respondent By : Shri Ujjawal Mandal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2026 O R D E R Per Yogesh Kumar U.S.: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 12.12.2025, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”, For Short) For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, An Intimation Order Came To Be Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 18.12.2021 By The Cpc By Demanding A Sum Of Rs.37,94,190/- On Following Two Adjustments:- (I) Disallowance Of Bonus Paid To Employees Amounting To Rs.1,20,74,572/-. (Ii) Disallowance Of Employees’ Contributions To Provident Fund (Pf) & Employee State Insurance (Esi) Amounting To Rs.16,73,030/- On Account Of Delayed Deposit Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Act. Goodwill Tea & Industries Limited; A.Y: 2020-21 Further, Assessee Filed An Application For Rectification U/S 154 Of The Act To Rectify The Error Apparent From Records In The Intimation Issued U/S 143(1) Of The Act. An Order U/S 154 R.W.S. 143(1) Came To Be Passed On 18.12.2023 By The Cpc By Dismissing The Application Filed By The Assessee. Aggrieved By The Order Dated 18.12.2023, Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A). The Ld. Cit(A) Vide Order Dated 12.12.2025, Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee. As Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Assessee Filed The Present Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Amber Singh Walia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ujjawal Mandal, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

M/S. Lucas Indian Service Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp. Cirlce-4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1132/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.1131 & 1132/Chny/2026 (ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2018-19 & 2020-21) M/S.Lucas Indian Service Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of No.28, Poomagal Main Road Vs. Income-Tax Behind Olympia Tech Park Corporate Circle 4(1) Ekkattuthangal, Chennai. Chennai – 600 032. [Pan:Aaacl1018J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S.P.Chidambaram, Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anshu Sharawat, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.07.2026 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 & Ay 2020-21, Vide Order Dated 10.12.2025 & 10.12.2025 Respectively Against The Assessment Orders Passed By Assessment Unit, Nfac, Delhi, (In Short “The Ao”) U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”) Dated 10.02.2021 &

For Appellant: Shri. S.P.Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anshu Sharawat, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

M/S. Lucas Indian Service Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1131/CHNY/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Aug 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.1131 & 1132/Chny/2026 (ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2018-19 & 2020-21) M/S.Lucas Indian Service Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of No.28, Poomagal Main Road Vs. Income-Tax Behind Olympia Tech Park Corporate Circle 4(1) Ekkattuthangal, Chennai. Chennai – 600 032. [Pan:Aaacl1018J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S.P.Chidambaram, Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anshu Sharawat, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.07.2026 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 & Ay 2020-21, Vide Order Dated 10.12.2025 & 10.12.2025 Respectively Against The Assessment Orders Passed By Assessment Unit, Nfac, Delhi, (In Short “The Ao”) U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”) Dated 10.02.2021 &

For Appellant: Shri. S.P.Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anshu Sharawat, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)