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)

The ACIT-1(1), Indore vs. M/S. Bridgestone India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 210/IND/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit-1(1) M/S. Bridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. Indore Plot No.A-43, Phase-Ii, Midc, Vs. Chakan, Pune, Maharastra (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcb2304E Revenue By Shri Ankit Guttani & Yash Daga, Ars Assessee By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2023

Section 36(1)(va)

Smt. Vasanthi Padmanabha Sherugar, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 545/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Huilgol, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sridharan P, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Phoenix Poultry, Jabalpur vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1), Jabalpur

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

ITA 76/JAB/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalephoenix Poultry, Vs. Acit, Circle -1(1) 201, Ratan Colony, Jabalpur, Gorakhpur, Madhya Pradesh. Jabalpur- 482001. Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Aajfp5811H Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri Dhiraj Ghai, Ca Respondentby : Shri, Shiv Kumar. Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(1)And 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, CAFor Respondent: Shri, Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Arihant Automobile, Jabalpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Jabalpur

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

ITA 28/JAB/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalearihant Automobiles Vs. Ito, Ward-2(2) 984, Wright Town, Jabalpur Jabalpur-482002, Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Aahfa2701P Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement .09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(1)And 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S Tarun Construction Company, Ward No.24, Near Bhagat Singh Chowk, Suratgarh vs. CPC, Bangalore/ ITO, Ward-1, Sriganganagar

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 109/JODH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S Tarun Construction Company, Ward No.24, Near Bhagat Singh Chowk, Suratgarh vs. CPC, Bangalore/ ITO, Ward-1, Sriganganagar

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 108/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

Siddhanth Ex - Servicemen Security Services, Vasco vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 90/PAN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri P.R.V. RaghavanFor Respondent: Smt. Ashwini Hosmani
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

Shree Poly Films Private Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax/ Assistent Commissione of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 124/VIZ/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.124/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Shree Poly Films Private Limited Vs. Dcit/Acit D.No.50-53-11/10 Circle-3(1) Revathi Vihar Apartment Visakhapatnam Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aalcs3403K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar Aves, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Amaravathi Power Associates, Visakhapatanam vs. DCIT/ACIT, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatanam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 104/VIZ/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Sept 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.104/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Amaravathi Power Associates Vs. Dcit/Acit D.No.36-91-30, Ravindra Nagar Circle-3(1) Kancharapalem, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aanfa4444M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar Aves, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Solapur Dcc Bank Employees Co- Operative Society Limited, Solapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(3), Solapur

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in above terms

ITA 713/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 713/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Solapur Dcc Bank Employees Co-Op Society Ltd., 46 Vistarit Imarat, Yogeshwar Complex, Solapur Zilla Madhyawarat Bank, Navi Peth Solapur – 413001 Pan: Aabas9454N . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri R.Y. Balawade
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80P

M/S Sairung Developers & Promoters Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Pune

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

ITA 485/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 144Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

Vishash Agarwal, Tinsukia vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Dibrugarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 39/GTY/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.39/Gty/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vishesh Agarwal…………………..……....….........…..........….…… Appellant C/O Assam Pushpak Travel Agency, Makum Road, Tinsukia, Assam – 786170. [Pan: Aghpa7072R] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Dibrugarh……………..….…..…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Soumendu Sekhar Das, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 20, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 20, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.03.2020 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

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

Ask Wealth Advisors Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(1)(2)., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1904/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1904/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Ask Wealth Advisors Pvt. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-6(1)(2) Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Birla Aurora, 16 Level, 400020. Office Floor 9, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400030. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafca9124M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shreyam B. Shah Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)], Delhi Dated 11.06.2022 For Ay. 2018-19. 2. This Is Second Round Before This Tribunal. It Is Noted That This Captioned Appeal Of Assessee Was Partly Allowed In The First Round By This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 30.09.2022. However, The Same Has Been Recalled In Ma No. 298/Mum/2023 In The Light Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court Decision In The Case Of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cit (448 Itr 518). Therefore, This Appeal Is Adjudicated Afresh. The Main Grievance Of Assessee Is Against The Action Of Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Disallowance Of Employee’S Contribution Made Towards Pf/Esi To The Tune Of Rs.12,18,871/-.

For Appellant: Shri Shreyam B. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (Sr. AR)
Section 10ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)

Promise Manpoer Services Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-20(2), Delhi

ITA 302/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra[A.Y. 2018-19]

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Ultra Tech Engineers, Rajasthan vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(3), Bulandshahr

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1457/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Time Amounting To Rs.13,61,143/, Which Is Apparent From The Face Of Impugned Order Itself.

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 22(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 1117/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Y.K. Mahagan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 244ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40A(9)Section 43B

Desein P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 634/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Surender Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 250oSection 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B

M/S Comfy Shoe Makers Private Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 688/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.688/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Comfy Shoe Makers Private The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, No. 295, Sidco Industrial Vs. Income Tax, Estate, Ambattur, Chennai 600 098. Corporate Circle 1(1), [Pan:Aabcc2556M] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 14.07.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-20. Vide Order In M.P. No. 88/Chny/2023 Dated 15.09.2023, The Captioned Appeal Order Dated 26.09.2022 Has Been Recalled & Restored For Fresh Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 41Section 43B

Amulya Leather Impex, Chennai vs. DCIT Circle 8 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 686/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.686/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Amulya Leather Impex, The Assistant Commissioner Of Plot No. 39, Vgp Amudha Nagar, Vs. Income Tax Maduravoyal, Chennai 600 095 Non Corporate Circle 8(1), [Pan:Aadfa4763F] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Subramanian ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Dated 07.07.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-20. Vide Order In M.P. No. 213/Chny/2022 Dated 15.09.2023, The Captioned Appeal Order Dated 26.09.2022 Has Been Recalled & Restored For Fresh Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 41Section 43B

M/S Buildhr Management Consultants Private Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 609/CHNY/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 609/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/S. Buildhr Management The Joint Commissioner Of Consultants Private Limited V. Income Tax, 3A/8, Thangal Ulvail Street, (Osd), Virugambakkam, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 092. Chennai. [Pan: Aaecb-6784-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 41Section 43B