Section 36(1)(va) vs Section 43B: Deduction of Employees' PF/ESI After Checkmate Services



The Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT has categorically held that employees' contribution to PF/ESI is governed by section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Act, and such contribution shall be treated as income of the employer if not deposited within the due date prescribed under the relevant Acts. Section 43B applies only to employer's contribution, and not to the employees' contribution. 

Section 36(1)(va) vs Section 43B: Deduction of Employees  PF/ESI After Checkmate Services

Thus, the law as settled by the Supreme Court is that delayed remittance of employees' contribution, even if deposited before filing of return under section 139(1), is not allowable as a deduction. ITAT after ITAT and High Court after High Courts have ruled accordingly. A chance was taken again with the argument that the issue was debatable at the time of processing and, therefore, could not be adjusted under section 143(1)(a) in the case of M/s SRC PROJECTS PVT LTD Vs THE ACIT [2025-VIL-1647-ITAT-CHE]. However, this too was held not tenable in view of the decisions of the coordinate Benches of the Tribunal, which held that such an adjustment can be made under section 143(1)(a) based on information available in the tax audit report.

 

A little ray of Hope as a writ has been filed with the Delhi HC to examine the constitutional validity of Section 2(24)(x) r.w. Section 36(1)(va). The Delhi HC has issued notice in the Writ Petition preferred by the Assessee (Aroon Aviation Services Pvt Ltd) challenging the constitutional validity of the provisions of Section 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va); Section 2(24)(x) seeks to treat the employee's contribution deducted by the employer relating to PF and ESI etc. as income of the employer and no deduction is permissible under section 36(1)(va) to the employer if such contributions are deposited with the Government after the due date prescribed under the relevant enactment dealing with such social contributions;

 

Assessee has contended that in view of the SC judgment in Checkmate Services, the employers are being exposed to mandatory disallowance even in genuine/bona fide cases even if the delay is of a single day and for reasons beyond the control of the employer; The matter is listed on April 7, 2026. Till such time… Fingers crossed!




About the Author

DESIGNATED PARTNER

Mr. Vivek Jalan is a FCA, Qualified LL.M (Constitutional Law) and LL.B. He is the Chairman of The Fiscal Affairs and Taxation Committee of The Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry. He is the Convenor on Indirect Taxes of the CII- Economic Affairs and Taxation Committee (ER); He is also a visiting faculty for Indirec ... Read more


CCI Pro

Comments


Related Articles


Loading


Popular Articles





CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members

CCI Articles

submit article


Company
12 June 2026
Accounts & Taxation Executive

Winshine Financial Services

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
22 May 2026
Audit assistant

Displayandbeyond

Mumbai

CA

View Details
Company
Featured 15 June 2026
Senior Auditor

N. Dhawan & Co

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 08 June 2026
Internal & Taxation Article

O P Bagla & Co LLP

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
Featured 27 May 2026
Lead Conversion Executive / Sales Closing Executive

SMJ global advisors pvt ltd

New Delhi

B.Com

View Details
Company
29 May 2026
Accounts assistant

Shubh Consultancy

Mumbai

Graduate (Any)

View Details
Company
04 June 2026
Semi Qualified CA

Goyal Puneet & Associates

New Delhi

CA Final

View Details
Company
26 May 2026
Education Content Creator

Adyayam Education LLP

Bengaluru

CA Foundation

View Details