Which cases are most cited on Section 43B?

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; CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (349 ITR 336) — 956 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 43B?

BharatTax indexes 7,161 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 43B of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 43B of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508) is the decision most relied on for Section 43B, 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: 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

Charotar Gas Sahkari Mandali Ltd., Anand vs. The Dy. CIT, Anand Circle, Anand

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 247/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-D.R

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2Section 271(1)(c)Section 37Section 43B

Hotel Sai Siddhi Pvt. Ltd., Nashik vs. ACIT, Central Cir-1, Nashik

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

ITA 941/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12 Hotel Sai Siddhi Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Central Circle – 1, Plot No.3/4, Poush Sector-A, Agra Nashik Vs. Road, Lekhanagar, Nashik – 422009 Pan: Aabch4310G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket Joshi Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-06-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04-07-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43B

DCIT, Delhi vs. Punjab National Bank, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2948/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 32(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 43B

Prashant Ghanshyam Patel(Prop. Delta Paper), Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(2), Vadodara

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

ITA 502/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalprashant Ghanshyam Patel(Prop. Income Tax Officer, Vs. Delta Paper), Ward-3(1)(2), 9/A Dipika Society No.1, Vadodara. Water Tank Road, Karelibaug, Vadodara-390002. [Pan :Ahnpp5286 H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Adjournment Application Filed Respondent By: Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03.07.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: Adjournment Application filedFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT. DR

Section 43B

Ganga Reddy Gidde, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-1, Nizamabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 541/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Ashutosh Pradhan, Sr. AR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 43BSection 80C

Jntl Consumer Health (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 15(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2113/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Paras Savla/Pratik PodarFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik (SR DR)

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 43B

Laqshya Media Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 10(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1339/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhaillaqshya Media Limited, Jaganlaxmi, Laqshya House, Next To Rameshwar Temple, Saraswati Baug, Society Road, Jogeshwari (E), ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400060 Pan : Aaacl5004C V/S Acit – 10(1)(1), ……………… Respondent Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Ravi SawanaFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)

Wilson Engineering Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 1(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 518/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 43B

Indo-Mim Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 587/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.587/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S. Indo-Mim Ltd Vs. Dy.Cit Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabci0484L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 30/06/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)

F5 Networks Innovation Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 912/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Narender Kumar Naik

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92C

Dhanuka Agritech Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed as indicated above

ITA 1794/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 43B

Technoblast Mining Corporation, Raigarh vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 307/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.307/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Technoblast Mining Corporation 19, 2Nd Floor, Krishna Complex, Chaityana Nagar, Raigarh (C.G.)- 496 001 Pan: Aaeft5992Q

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

Deputy Commssioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Visakhapatnamportauthority Vs. Theasst.Cit -Circle-1(1) Administrative Office Building 4 Th Floor, Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530001 Mvp Road, Beside Post Office Andhra Pradesh-530001. Sector-8, Mvp Colony Visakhapatnam – 530017 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.103/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Dy.Cit Vs. Visakhapatnamportauthority Room No. 412, 4 Th Floor Administrative Office Building Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530035 Mvp Double Road Andhra Pradesh Opp. Rythubazar Visakhapatnam – 530014 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)

Planex Projects and Constructions Private Limited, Ernakulam vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kozhikode

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

ITA 844/COCH/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Jun 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2019-20 Planex Projects & Constructions Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant No. Xxv/4, Kerala State Houseing Building Changampuzha Nagar,South Kalamassery 682 [Pan: Aagcp3634A] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward-1(1) & Tps, Kozhikode Appellant By: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Surat [Cit(A)] Dated 10.07.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Execution Of Civil Contracts. The Return Of Income For Ay 2019-20 Was Filed On 30.10.2019 Declaring Nil Income. The Same Was Revised On 06.06.2020 At Nil Income. The 2 Planex Projects & Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Said Return Of Income Was Processed By The Cpc U/S. 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Vide Intimation Dated 22.09.2020 After Making Adjustment Of Unpaid Gst Of Rs. 67,54,054/-.

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 43B

Savita Bappa Jogdand, Pune vs. Income Tax Authority, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 953/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.953/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Savita Bappa Jogdand, V The Income Tax Dyansagar Society, Balajin S Authority, Pune. Ganeshnagar Nr.Indraprast, Pune Nashik Road, Medankarwadi Post, Chakan, Ta Khed, Dist. Pune – 410501. Maharashtra. Pan: Amypj7084P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Priyanka Tayade Rathi – Ca Revenue By Shri Rajesh Haladkar – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 25/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/06/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-Kochi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 06.03.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed U/S.143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For A.Y.2021-22 Dated 10.12.2022. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 28Section 43Section 43BSection 44A