https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77076 Employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI, though treated as income under section 2(24)(x) of the Income-tax Act, remains deductible under section 36(1)(va) if actually deposited before filing the return. The Delhi HC followed the settled view in P.M. Electronics Ltd. and AIMIL Limited, holding that delayed deposit under the welfare statutes did not by itself justify disallowance for income-tax purposes. The Revenue's attempted distinction between employer's and employees' contributions was rejected, and the disallowance was held unsustainable. en-us Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Feb 2026 16:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77076 Employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI, though treated as income under section 2(24)(x) of the Income-tax Act, remains deductible under section 36(1)(va) if actually deposited before filing the return. The Delhi HC followed the settled view in P.M. Electronics Ltd. and AIMIL Limited, holding that delayed deposit under the welfare statutes did not by itself justify disallowance for income-tax purposes. The Revenue's attempted distinction between employer's and employees' contributions was rejected, and the disallowance was held unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77076