Which cases are most cited on Section 36(1)(va)?

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508) — 1,629 citing judgments; Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (143 Taxmann.com 178) — 1,392 citing judgments; CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306) — 1,344 citing judgments; CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170) — 1,158 citing judgments; 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises (298 ITR 141) — 706 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 36(1)(va)?

BharatTax indexes 6,054 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508) is the decision most relied on for Section 36(1)(va), cited in 1,629 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).

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 Act Read section 30 of the 2025 Act Read section 31 of the 2025 Act Read 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)

Chemical Process Piping Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 2045/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2045/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Chemical Process Piping बिधम/ Acit, Circle-14(1)(2) Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Vs. Ground Floor, Cpe Plot, Road, Mumbai-400020. Bsd Marg, Govandi, Mumbai-400088. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccc6212D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar Revenue By: Shri Samual Pitta (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23/06/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/07/2023 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, Delhi Dated 26.08.2021 For Ay. 2019-20. 2. It Is Noted That This Captioned Appeal Was Allowed In The First Round By This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 31.05.2022. However, The Same Has Been Recalled In Ma No. 428/Mum/2022 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.8,12,924/-. 3. Despite Notice Of Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of This Appeal After Hearing The Ld. Dr. From A Perusal Of The Records, It Is Discerned That The Cpc Bangalore Passed The Intimation Order U/S 143(1) Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) & Made Adjustment Of Rs. 8,12,924/- U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act For Late Deposit Of Employee’S

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kumar SutharFor Respondent: Shri Samual Pitta (Sr. AR)

Section 10ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

Reloy Shield Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-19(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 972/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: C. A

Section 143(1)(a)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

Srg Earth Resources Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. Asst.DIT, CPC, Bengalure, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 287/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 287/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Srg Earth Resources Private Limited Asst. Dit, Cpc, Bengaluru 16, Ganesh Chandra Avenue Vs Gandhi House, Dalhousie Kolkata - 700013 [Pan : Aajcs2276A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. S. Dasgupta, Fca Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/07/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 10/01/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeal 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. 3. The Issue Raised By The Assessee Has Come To Rest By The Recent Verdict Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cit (2022) 143 Taxmann.Com 178 (Sc) Dated 12.10.2022 Wherein It Has Been Held That “Deduction U/S 36(1)(Va) In Respect Of Delayed Deposit

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Dasgupta, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT D/R

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

M/S. Sri Venkateshwara Cans Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT (CPC) Bangalore, Bangalore

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

ITA 1481/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Sri Venkateswara Vs. Assistant Director Of Cans Private Limited Income Tax, Cpc, B Building, Unit No. 5, Income Tax Department, Tejpal Industrial Estate, Centralised Processing Andheri Kurla Road, Centre, Bangalore Sakinaka, Andheri 560500 Mumbai – 400072 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcs5704R Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Radhakant Saraf Respondent By : Suresh D. Gaikwad Date Of Hearing 13.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Dated 09.03.2023 For A.Y. 2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us:

For Appellant: Radhakant SarafFor Respondent: Suresh D. Gaikwad

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

Wns Global Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Comm. of Income Tax -14(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2451/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234CSection 43BSection 92C

Wns Global Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Comm. of Income Tax-14(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2450/MUM/2022[208-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234CSection 43BSection 92C

Welgrow Hotels Concepts P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-27(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 436/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2018-19 Welgrow Hotels Concepts P. Ltd., Vs Ito, B-6, Geetanjali Enclave, Ward-27(1), Malviya Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 017. Pan: Aaacw5407C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. Krishnan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: This Appeal In Ita No.436/Del/2023 For Ay 2018-19 Arises Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’, In Short] In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048179868(1) Dated 22.12.2022 Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 154 R.W.S. 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 02.12.2020 By The Ld. Assessing Officer, Ward 27(1), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’). 2. The Only Issue To Be Decided In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Confirming The Disallowance Made On Account Of Employee’S Contribution Of Provident Fund & Employee State Insurance In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Instant Case.

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Delhi vs. Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 and appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 and 2018-19 are dismissed

ITA 2051/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Singh Kothari, CIT DR DR

Section 144Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36

Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 and appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 and 2018-19 are dismissed

ITA 1569/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Singh Kothari, CIT DR DR

Section 144Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36

Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 and appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 and 2018-19 are dismissed

ITA 1568/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Singh Kothari, CIT DR DR

Section 144Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36

DCIT, Cir-1(1), Kol, Kolkata vs. M/S. North Brook Jute Company Ltd, Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross- objection file by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as per the terms indicated above

ITA 501/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mita Rizvi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT Sr. D/R

Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Starline Workshop, Mumbai vs. ITO WD1(1) (1), Mumbai

ITA 1742/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Return. 3. The Appellant Prays That The Adjustment Made In The Intimation Order U/S 143(1) Of The Act May Be Deleted. 4. The Appellant Craves Your Honour'S Leave To Add, Alter Or Amend Any Ground Of Appeal At The Time Of Hearing Or Before.”

For Appellant: Shri Ryan Saldanha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

Cargo Motors Gujrat Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 5(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 239/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2(24)(X)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Smg International, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-30(5), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1500/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Shukla, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)(A)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

Shri Devendra Singh Chouhan, Indore vs. The ITO Ward-1(4), Indore

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 202/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidevendra Singh Chauhan Ito-Ward 9, Schemeno.113, Vijay 1(4) Vs. Nagar Indore Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adcpc 7046 H Assessee By Shri Girdhar Garg, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25 .07.2023

Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)