NEUBERG DIAGNOSTICS PVT. LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, CORP. WARD-4(1), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the disallowance of Rs. 4,89,58,868 under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was not sustainable. The Tribunal noted that a primary requirement for invoking Section 14A is that there must be expenditure incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income. In this case, there was no dispute that the assessee did not earn any exempt income during AY 2018-19. The Tribunal referred to the jurisdictional High Court of Madras decision in *CIT v. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd.*, which held that no disallowance under Section 14A could be made if no exempt income was earned. Therefore, the disallowance made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) was set aside. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. The judgment also discusses other issues related to disallowance of expenditure and cash deposits under Section 69A, which were restored to the file of the AO for verification.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Neuberg Diagnostics Private Limited, is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. The assessee's return for AY 2018-19 showed nil income and a loss of Rs. 8,59,98,553. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated scrutiny and observed significant paid-up share capital, unsecured loans, and investments in unlisted equities and a partnership firm. The AO also noted finance costs (interest paid to others) of Rs. 6,77,69,491. The AO proposed disallowance of interest under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the extent of investments made to earn exempt income. The assessee contended that no exempt income was earned, making Section 14A inapplicable. The AO disallowed Rs. 4,89,58,868. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's order. The assessee also filed appeals for AY 2023-24, but one appeal for AY 2018-19 (ITA No. 3804/Chny/2025) was withdrawn as infructuous.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the disallowance of Rs. 4,89,58,868 under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, is sustainable in law when the assessee admittedly had not earned any exempt income during the relevant assessment year (AY 2018-19)? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that since no exempt income was earned during the assessment year, the disallowance of interest under Section 14A was not warranted. The assessee relied on judicial precedents including *Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd.* (Delhi High Court), *Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Avantha Realty Ltd.* (Calcutta High Court), and *Williamson Financial Services Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax* (Gauhati High Court), among others. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue relied on the orders of the authorities below.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA
PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM
The present appeals of the assessee are directed against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld.CIT(A)”), arising out of the separate assessment orders pas
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026