THE INDIA CEMENTS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1) CHENNAI, CHENNAI

ITA 2174/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 January 2026AY 2017-1834 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that disallowance under Section 14A should be computed with reference to only those investments that yielded exempt income, and directed the AO to re-compute the disallowance as per the amended Rule 8D. Regarding interest-free advances to subsidiaries, the Tribunal noted the assessee's argument of commercial expediency but did not provide a final decision in the provided text.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed profit from the sale of Mutual Funds as exempt income. The AO disallowed expenses related to this exempt income under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The assessee also claimed interest expenses on borrowings, but the AO disallowed a portion of it, considering interest-free advances given to subsidiaries.

What were the issues?

Whether expenses related to exempt income are to be disallowed under Section 14A, and whether interest on borrowings for interest-free advances to subsidiaries is deductible.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 115JB,Section 36(1)(iii),Section 68,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(15)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

ITA No.2174/Chny/2024 (AY 2017-18) M/s. The India Cements Ltd.

2.

Ground No. 1 of the appeal is general in nature which doesn't require any adjudication and is therefore dismissed.

3.

Ground No.2 raised by the assessee relates to the disallowance of ₹1,07,44,451/- made by the AO u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act 1961 (herein after the Act) in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules 1962 (herein after the Rules). Briefly stated, the AO had observed from the balance-sheet that the assessee held substantial investments which were capable of yielding tax-free income and therefore, according to him, the expenditure incurred in relation to earning such exempt income was to be disallowed under Section 14A of the Act. The AO inter alia also observed that, the assessee didn't derive any dividend income from these investments, but had claimed profit to the extent of ₹1,07,44,451/- earned from sale of Mutual Funds as exempt u/s.10(39) of the Act. The AO accordingly show caused the assessee to explain as to why expenditure incurred for earning such exempt income should not be disallowed, in accordance with Rule 8D. In response, the assessee explained that, the investments which yielded ex

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.

See plans and prices

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

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →