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)

Kavitha Suvvari, Srikakulam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Srikakulam

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 214/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sri Madhukar Aves, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B

Dipen Kumarpal Parekh, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, NFAC, New Delhi

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

ITA 1702/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledipen Kumarpal Parekh Vs. Assessing Officer, 603, Patel Niwas, Sainath Nfac, New Delhi Road, Malad (W) Mumbai – 4000064. Pan/Gir No. : Aadpp6112D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Ashwin Kashinath.Ar Respondent By : Shri R.P. Veena.Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Ashwin Kashinath.ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Veena.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S. Intellect Bizware Services Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1935/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. H.M. Bhatt, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Tina Kalra, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-45(1), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2931/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharatasstt. Yr: 2020-21

Section 2(24)(x)Section 34Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Smt. Trushaba C. Manek L/H. of Late. Shri Chandrasinh P. Manek (Properitor of Dwarkesh Enterprise), Okha, Dist. Jamnagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 91/RJT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Mrs. Madhumita Roy(Through Web-Based Video Conferencing Platform) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mrs. Trushaba C. Manek, Vs. Principal Commissioner Of L/H. Of Late Shri Chandrasinh P. Income-Tax, Manek (Prop. Of Dwarkesh Jamnagar Enterprise), Bazar Lane, Raghunath Road, Okha, Gujarat Pan : Aijpm 0949 F अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Dushyant Maharshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29.08.2023 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Jamnagar [Hereinafter Referred To As “Pcit”] Dated 30.03.2021, In Exercise Of His Revisionary Powers Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “1. Hon'Ble Pr. Cit Had Issued Notice U/S. 263 In The Name Of Deceased Person, Therefore Notice Issued U/S. 263 Is Not Valid In The Eyes Of Law & Hence Required To Be Quashed. 2. Hon'Ble Pr. Cit, Jamnagar Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Invoking His Revisionary Powers U/S. 263 Without Having Valid Jurisdiction For Addition Of Income U/S. 2(24)(X) R.W.S. 36(1)(Va) Of The Act For Epf For Rs. 8,35,800/- Whereas Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny On The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

D V Properties Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - 1, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 121/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) D. V. Properties Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit - 1, 748-749, Golden Plaza Market, Surat. Ring Road, Surat – 395002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacd8392B (Appellant) (Respondent) Ms Chaitali Shah, Ca Appellant By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing 19/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2023

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)Section 43B

Shalu Dyeing Ptg Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Surat

ITA 118/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shalu Dyeing Ptg Mills Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, 262 G.I.D.C Industrial Estate, Pandesara, Circle-2(1)(1), Surat – 394221. Surat. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcs8213P Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 15/06/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68Section 69C

Reliance Fire Brigade Services Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CPC, Bangalore

ITA 1631/MUM/2021[F.Y.2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Ess Ess Kay Engineering Company Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -4, Jalandhar

In the result, the appellant’s appeal is Dismissed

ITA 143/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.143/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B

M/S. Singals & Systems India Pvt. Ltd, Siruseri, Chennai vs. DCIT, Company Circle VI, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 460/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 43B

Shri. Bettamalenahalli Jawaregowda Basavaraju, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 464/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Sukruth, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

M/S Mfar Developers Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 335/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: S/Shri C.R. Krishna & Sachin Mehta, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Mehere Yogesh Prabhakara Rao
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 40A(3)Section 43B

M/S Mfar Developers Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 334/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: S/Shri C.R. Krishna & Sachin Mehta, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Mehere Yogesh Prabhakara Rao
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 40A(3)Section 43B

Sadanand Champakrao Manekar, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Begaluru

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

ITA 1516/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesadanand Champak Rao Vs. Dcit, Cpc Manekar Bangalore.-560500 C/O Sanjay Vhanbatte & Compnay, Cts No. 245, C/1, First Floor, Mahalaxmi Bank Bldg, Near Kelavkar Hospital Tarabai Park, Mumbai – 416003. Pan/Gir No. : Acepm7834N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Bhavesh Jain.Ar Respondent By : Shri Rp Veena.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Passed U/S 143(1) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal. Sadanand Champakrao Manekar, Mumbai. 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru By Way Of Adjustment U/S 143(1)(A) In Respect Of Employees' Contribution To Provident Fund & Esic Payment Of Rs. 14,21,489/- As Not Being Allowable As Deduction Under Section 36(1)(Va) As The Contribution Has Been Deposited With The Respective Authority After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Law. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A), Erred In Not Accepting The Contention Of The Appellant That Such Action Of The Dcit Does Not Fall Within The Ambit Of The Adjustments Prescribed Under Section 143(1)(A). The Appellant Craves Leave To Add To, Amend, Alter, Modify, Delete Or Add A New Ground Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Bhavesh Jain.ARFor Respondent: Shri RP Veena.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

JCIT Central Circle-19, New Delhi, Delhi vs. M/S Jaquar and Company Pvt Ltd, Delhi

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

ITA 1713/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh.Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2018-19 Jcit M/S Jaguar & Company Central Circle -19 Vs Pvt. Ltd. C-20, Sma Co-Op New Delhi Industrial Estate, Gt Karnal Road, Jahangir Puri, A Block Delhi, Delhi Pan No.Aaacj2324F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36

Modern Veer Rays Security Force (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Incometax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1167/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2019-20
Section 143(1)Section 43B

M/S Modern Veer Rays Security Force (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Centralized Processing Centre, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1166/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2018-2019
Section 143(1)Section 43B

Gajra Differential Gears Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2070/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashat Maharshi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Gajra Differential Gears Ltd. Cit(A) Elve Chambers, Ground Floor, National Faceless Appeal Center Vs. Green Street, Fort, New Delhi Mumbai-400023 Pan/Gir No.Aaacg1586C (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : None : Shri. Swapnil Sawant Revenue By : 01.08.2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 01.08.2023
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S. Nilamber Dyeing and Bleaching Mills Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 1990/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalenilamber Dyeing & Vs. Ito Circle 5(2)(1), Bleaching Mills Pvt Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, 12/2, Sethia Bhavan Dr. M.K.Road, Dd Sathe Marg, Mumbai-400020. Girgaon-400004, Mumbai Pan/Gir No. : Aabcn8531H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Ms. R.M. Brindha.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(1) & 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. R.M. Brindha.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

Ess Ess Kay Engineering Company Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 172/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar23 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Digvijai Kumar Chaudhary, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B