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

ITO, Chennai vs. Goldquest International Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 780/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Aug 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.412/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2006-07 M/S. Goldquest International Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, The Rain Tree Place, ‘B’ Wing, 9Th Vs. Company Circle Ii (1), Floor, No. 7, Mcnichols Road, Chetpet, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 031. [Pan: Aabcg3717C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.780/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2006-07 The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Goldquest International Pvt. Ltd., The Rain Tree Place, ‘B’ Wing, 9Th Floor, Corporate Ward 2(2), Vs. Chennai - 34. No. 7, Mcnichols Road, Chetpet, Chennai 600 031. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G. Seetharaman, C.A. Department By : Shri Asish Tripathi, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -

For Appellant: Shri G. Seetharaman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Asish Tripathi, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 40Section 43B

Goldquest International Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 412/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Aug 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.412/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2006-07 M/S. Goldquest International Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, The Rain Tree Place, ‘B’ Wing, 9Th Vs. Company Circle Ii (1), Floor, No. 7, Mcnichols Road, Chetpet, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 031. [Pan: Aabcg3717C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.780/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2006-07 The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Goldquest International Pvt. Ltd., The Rain Tree Place, ‘B’ Wing, 9Th Floor, Corporate Ward 2(2), Vs. Chennai - 34. No. 7, Mcnichols Road, Chetpet, Chennai 600 031. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G. Seetharaman, C.A. Department By : Shri Asish Tripathi, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -

For Appellant: Shri G. Seetharaman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Asish Tripathi, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 40Section 43B

M/S. Jyoti Construction, Keonjhar vs. Principal CIT, Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 188/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.188/Ctk/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-2012) M/S Jyoti Construction, Barbil, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Keonjhar Sambalpur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacfj 8820 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyajit Nanda, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh, Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 15.03.2016, Passed U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Sole Substantive Ground Raised By The Assessee That The Order Passed By Ld.Cit Is Without Merit & Does Not Satisfy The Twin Conditions Required Under The Law. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Engaged In Contract Works & Filed The Return Of Income Electronically On 19.10.2011 With Total Income Of Rs.70,67,777/-. Subsequently Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Notices U/S.143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. In Compliance, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Appeared & Case Was Discussed & Produced Financial Statements. Ld. Ao After Verifying The Various Documents Found That The Assessee Has Not Paid The Statutory Liability Before The Due Date Of Filing Of 2 Return Of Income U/S.139() Of The Act & Disallowed U/S.43B Of The Act

For Appellant: Shri Satyajit Nanda, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CITDR
Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 263Section 40Section 43B