Provident fund and ESI deduction depends on fund-law due date; delayed employee contribution was not allowed.

Employee's contribution to provident fund and ESI is allowable only if credited within the due date prescribed under the relevant fund law; the Court held that section 36(1)(va) turns on compliance with that fund-specific deadline, not merely payment before the income-tax return due date. It also held that the phrase "within fifteen days of the close of every month" in section 38 of the EPF Act refers to the month for which wages are payable, so the deposit obligation is not postponed because wages are paid in the following month. The delayed employee contribution was therefore disallowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether employee's contribution to provident fund and ESI, if deposited after the due date under the relevant fund law but before the due date for filing the return, is allowable as a deduction under the Income-tax Act.

Analysis: The Court followed the settled position that the allowance under section 36(1)(va) depends on crediting the employee's contribution to the relevant fund within the due date prescribed for that purpose. The expression "within fifteen days of the close of every month" in section 38 of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 was held to refer to the month for which wages are payable and the corresponding obligation to deduct and deposit the contribution arises. The Court rejected the contention that payment of wages in the following month postpones the deposit deadline by another month.

Conclusion: The issue was answered in favour of the Revenue, and the disallowance of the delayed employee's contribution was upheld.

---