What is CIT v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure incurred by an assessee carrying on a composite business giving rise to both taxable and non-taxable income is allowable in its entirety without apportionment. This principle led to the subsequent introduction of Section 14A of the Income-tax Act.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd.?

109 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd. (82 ITR 452), spanning 2000 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 8D, Section 143(3), Section 4, Section 5, Section 115JB.

CIT v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd. (82 ITR 452)

Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Centrum Retail Services Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 5970/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: BEFORESHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Virabhadra Mahajan, (SR.DR.)For Respondent: Shri. Ravikant Pathak, CA

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…taxable income in a particular year. 9. We are unable to subscribe to the aforesaid view. The provisions of section 14A were inserted as a response to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Limited (1971) (82 ITR 452) and Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ((2002) 242 ITR 450) in terms of which, expenditure incurred by an assessee carrying on a composite business giving rise to both taxable as well as non-taxable income, was allowable in entirety without apportionment. It was thus that s.14A was inserted providing that no d…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Thiruvalluvar Textiles Private Limited, Namakkal

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2111/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Saujanya Ranjan, IRSFor Respondent: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCA

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…taxable income in a particular year. 9. We are unable to subscribe to the aforesaid view. The provisions of section 14A were inserted as a response to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Limited (1971) 82 ITR 452) and Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation v. Commissioner of Income Tax ((2002) 242 ITR 450) in terms of which, expenditure incurred by an assessee carrying on a composite business giving rise to both taxable as well as non-taxable income, was allowable in entirety without apportionment. It was thus that s.14A was inserted providing that no de…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Thiruvalluvar Textiles Private Limited, Namakkal

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2110/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Saujanya Ranjan, IRSFor Respondent: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCA

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…taxable income in a particular year. 9. We are unable to subscribe to the aforesaid view. The provisions of section 14A were inserted as a response to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Limited (1971) 82 ITR 452) and Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation v. Commissioner of Income Tax ((2002) 242 ITR 450) in terms of which, expenditure incurred by an assessee carrying on a composite business giving rise to both taxable as well as non-taxable income, was allowable in entirety without apportionment. It was thus that s.14A was inserted providing that no de…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the

ITA 1663/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Ms.Ann Marry Baby, CIT

Section 14ASection 92C

…taxable income in a particular year. 9. We are unable to subscribe to the aforesaid view. The provisions of section 14A were inserted as a response to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Limited [1971] 82 ITR 452 and Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 242 ITR 450 in terms of which, expenditure incurred by an assessee carrying on a composite business giving rise to both taxable as well as non-taxable income, was allowable in entirety without apportionment. It was thus that s.14A was inserted providing that no deduc…

Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Non Corp Circle 8(1) Ltu - II, Chennai

ITA 1402/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1402/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aaaса 4651 L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Ncc-8(1), Ltu-Ii, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1663/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Dcit, Ncc-8, Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aaaса 4651 L] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By : Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Department By : Ms.Ann Marry Baby, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2025 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Cross-Appeals Preferred By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Ann Marry Baby, CIT

Section 14ASection 92C

…y taxable income in a particular year. 9. We are unable to subscribe to the aforesaid view. The provisions of section 14A were inserted as a response to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Limited [1971] 82 ITR 452 and Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 242 ITR 450 in terms of which, expenditure incurred by an assessee carrying on a composite business giving rise to both taxable as well as non-taxable income, was allowable in entirety without apportionment. It was thus that s.14A was inserted providing that no deduc…

Bajaj Electricals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 2(1), Mumbai

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 110/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan-CIT-DR &

Section 115Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, PRESIDENT & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 4172/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Bajaj Electricals Limited, Addl.CIT-2(1), 45/47, Bombay Life Building, Veer Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Nariman Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACB2484Q Appellant) : Respondent) I.T.A. No. 110/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Bajaj Electricals Limited, Addl.CIT-2(1), 51, Mulla House, M.G. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Fort, mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACB2484Q Appellant) : Respondent) I.T.A. No.…

DCIT 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bajaj Electricals Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5749/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan-CIT-DR &

Section 115Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, PRESIDENT & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 4172/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Bajaj Electricals Limited, Addl.CIT-2(1), 45/47, Bombay Life Building, Veer Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Nariman Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACB2484Q Appellant) : Respondent) I.T.A. No. 110/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Bajaj Electricals Limited, Addl.CIT-2(1), 51, Mulla House, M.G. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Fort, mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACB2484Q Appellant) : Respondent) I.T.A. No.…

Bajaj Electricals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 2(1), Mumbai

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4172/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan-CIT-DR &

Section 115Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, PRESIDENT & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 4172/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Bajaj Electricals Limited, Addl.CIT-2(1), 45/47, Bombay Life Building, Veer Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Nariman Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACB2484Q Appellant) : Respondent) I.T.A. No. 110/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Bajaj Electricals Limited, Addl.CIT-2(1), 51, Mulla House, M.G. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Fort, mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACB2484Q Appellant) : Respondent) I.T.A. No.…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai

ITA 1262/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Cognizant Technology Solutions Vs The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai - 600 096. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Pan: Aaacd 3312M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai - 600 096. Pan: Aaacd 3312M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निधारिती की ओर से/Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.05.2025 - 2 -

For Respondent: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate

Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

…e extent of exempted income itself. ..... 9. We are unable to subscribe to the aforesaid view. The provisions of section 14A were inserted as a response to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd. [1971] 82 ITR 452 and Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2000] 242 ITR 450/109 taxmann.com 145 (SC) in terms of which, expenditure incurred by an assessee carrying on a composite business giving rise to both taxable as well as non-taxable income, was allowable in entirety without apportionment. It was thus that s.14A was inserte…

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Chennai

ITA 1207/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

…ent of exempted income itself. …….. ………… 9. We are unable to subscribe to the aforesaid view. The provisions of section 14A were inserted as a response to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd. [1971] 82 ITR 452 and Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2000] 242 ITR 450/109 taxmann.com 145 (SC) in terms of which, expenditure incurred by an assessee carrying on a composite business giving rise to both taxable as well as non-taxable income, was allowable in entirety without apportionment. It was thus that s.14A was inserte…

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Chennai

ITA 1193/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

…ent of exempted income itself. …….. ………… 9. We are unable to subscribe to the aforesaid view. The provisions of section 14A were inserted as a response to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd. [1971] 82 ITR 452 and Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2000] 242 ITR 450/109 taxmann.com 145 (SC) in terms of which, expenditure incurred by an assessee carrying on a composite business giving rise to both taxable as well as non-taxable income, was allowable in entirety without apportionment. It was thus that s.14A was inserte…

Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax 6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Incred Holdings Limited (Formerly Known As Kkr Capital Markets India Limited)., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in I

ITA 4366/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, A/RFor Respondent: Mr. R.A. Dhyani, CIT D/R & Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R

Section 14A

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "ायपीठ, मुंबई | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 4246/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 I.T.A. No. 4248/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 I.T.A. No. 4249/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 I.T.A. No. 4250/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Incred Holdings Limited Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 6(3)(2), Unit No. 1203 Vs Mumbai 12th Floor B Wing, The Capital Plot No. C-70, G Block BKC Mumbai - 400051 [PAN: AAECK1977B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant)…