Section 43B of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.37

Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 37 (Certain deductions allowed on actual payment basis only) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 37 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 43B is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 of the 7,161 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 43B

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.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders
349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court
956
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

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.

Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT
82 ITR 363 · 1971 · Supreme Court
654
citing judgments

Tax liability for an item of income or expenditure is determined solely by the provisions of the Income-tax Act. Entries in an assessee's books of account are not conclusive and do not govern the taxability or deductibility of an item, as the legal rights and obligations under the Act prevail.

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. Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn
41 Taxmann.com 100 · 2014 · High Court
540
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to provident fund or other welfare funds are deductible under section 36(1)(va) only if paid by the due date specified in the respective welfare fund enactments, and section 43B does not extend this period to the income tax return filing due date under section 139(1).

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.

Judgments on Section 43B

E.C.Bose & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-11, Kolkata

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

ITA 242/KOL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jul 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 147Section 148Section 43B

E.C. Bose & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-11, Kolkata

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

ITA 186/KOL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 147Section 148Section 43B

Satyam Computer Services Ld, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 7319/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice- & Shri Ravish Sood.

For Appellant: Shri. J.D. Mistry, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Mohan, CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 37(1)Section 43B

Sree Rayalaseema Green Steloy Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1431/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Jun 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi[Through Video Conferencing At Delhi] आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1431/H/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2006-07 M/S. Sree Rayalseema Green Steloy Ltd., 1St Floor, G3, H.No.5-10-197A, B&C, Reliance Krishna Apartments, Hill Fort, Hyderabad – 500 004 ….. अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan No. Aahcs 9760 M Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(1), ….. "त् यथ"/Respondent Hyderabad

For Respondent: Shri Sunku Srinivasu, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 250Section 43B

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Asea Brown Boveri Ltd

ITA/420/2012HC Karnataka24 Jun 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

Section 143(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 260Section 260ASection 40Section 43BSection 80H

Powernetics Equipment India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO 9(2)4, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3078/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhanआअसं. 3078/मुं/2016 ("न.व. 2011-12) M/S. Powernetics Equipments India Pvt. Ltd. 7C,Bindya, Bandra Reclamation, Bndra(W), Mumbai 400 050 Pan: Aaacp9311Q ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Hari S. RahejaFor Respondent: S/Shri A.Mohan & Uodal Raj Singh
Section 143(3)Section 35DSection 43BSection 68

M/S.Sonarome Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 1627/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Sonarome Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No.34, 35&36, Kiadb Income Tax, Industrial Area, Vs. Circle – 6(1)(2), Doddaballapur, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 561 203. Pan : Aadcs 9267 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. K. Seshadri, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Manjeet Singh, Addl. Cit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2020 O R D E R Per A.K. Garodiathis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee & The Same Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-6, Bengaluru, Dated 13.06.2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Initially, The Assessee Raised As Many As 11 Grounds Of Appeal But Subsequently, The Assessee Filed Concise Grounds Of Appeal Containing 3 Grounds. These Grounds As Per The Concise Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: 1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ("Cit(A)") Erred In Upholding The Disallowance Of Commission Expenditure Under Section 40(A)(I) Of The Act To The Tune Of 9.69.257 As No Tax Was Deductible At Source Thereon To The Extent Of 9.30.746.52 Because The Said Sums Were Not Chargeable To Tax In India. While Tax Was In Fact Deducted On A Sum Amounting To X38.511. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of X1.75.069 On Account Of Bonus & Ex-Gratia Without Appreciating That No Deductions Were Claimed For These Sums Page 2 Of 7

For Appellant: Shri. K. Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Manjeet Singh, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 40

Krez Hotel & Realty Limited (Formerly Known As Jaykaydee Industries Limted), Mumbai vs. JCIT(OSD) Central Circle-39, Mumbai

In the result this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2588/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2020AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Mani Jani-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria-(Ld. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153CSection 2(22)(e)Section 43B

M/S. C.S. Datamation Research Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 3915/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 43B

Debendra Coldstorage Private Limited, Hooghly vs. ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly

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

ITA 880/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Jsw Steel Limited

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA/139/2011HC Karnataka09 Jun 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 260ASection 43B

Brig. Narayan Nayak, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT-5(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, ITA No.30/CTK/2017 is partly allowed for

ITA 230/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.30/Ctk/2017 & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.230/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Brig. Narayan Nayak, Vs. Dcit, Circle-5(1), Prop: M/S Industrial Security & Bhubaneswar Allied Services, F3-F5, Id Market, Irc Village, Nayapalli, Bhubanesar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Abapn 3373 Q (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Sahoo, Ca िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/02/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Two Appeals, One Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Dated 27.10.2016 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.143(3) Of The Act & Another Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 14.04.2019 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Act. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.30/Ctk/2017, Wherein The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds :-

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Sahoo, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 43BSection 44A

Orissa State Co-Operative Handicrafts Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-4(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 393/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.392&393/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014 – 2015 & 2015-2016) M/S Orissa State Co-Operative Vs. Ito Wardd-4(1), Handicrafts Corporation Limited Bhubaneswar D-2/3, Industrial Estate, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaaao 0096 K (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Goutam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Goutam, CIT-DR
Section 80P(2)

Orissa State Co-Operative Handicrafts Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-4(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 392/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.392&393/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014 – 2015 & 2015-2016) M/S Orissa State Co-Operative Vs. Ito Wardd-4(1), Handicrafts Corporation Limited Bhubaneswar D-2/3, Industrial Estate, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaaao 0096 K (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Goutam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Goutam, CIT-DR
Section 80P(2)

Brig.Narayan Nayak, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, ITA No.30/CTK/2017 is partly allowed for

ITA 30/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.30/Ctk/2017 & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.230/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Brig. Narayan Nayak, Vs. Dcit, Circle-5(1), Prop: M/S Industrial Security & Bhubaneswar Allied Services, F3-F5, Id Market, Irc Village, Nayapalli, Bhubanesar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Abapn 3373 Q (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Sahoo, Ca िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/02/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Two Appeals, One Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Dated 27.10.2016 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.143(3) Of The Act & Another Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 14.04.2019 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Act. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.30/Ctk/2017, Wherein The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds :-

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Sahoo, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 43BSection 44A

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. M/S. K V Mohana Rao and Co Privite Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 539/VIZ/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.U.Mini Chandran, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 148

M/S Recorders and Medicare Systems Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 654/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.653 & 654/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 250(6)Section 43B

M/S Recorders and Medicare Systems Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 653/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.653 & 654/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 250(6)Section 43B

DCIT, Circle - 4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Andrew Yule & Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 525/KOL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

DCIT, Corporate Circle-3, Chennai vs. Cema Electric Lighting Products India Ltd, Chennai

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

ITA 18/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 18/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Cema Electric Lighting Products Income Tax, Vs. India Ltd., 10, Anna Avenue, Corporate Circle 1(2), Bhakthavatsalam Nagar, Adyar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 020 [Pan: Aaccc9663Q] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.05.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.05.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai Dated 27.10.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Effective Grounds Raised By The Revenue Are That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Made In Respect Of Employees Contribution Towards Provident Fund As Well As Deleting The Disallowance Of ₹.5.07 Crores Made In Respect Of The Disproportionate Expenditure Towards Salary & Wages.

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, JCITFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCA
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B