← All Phrases

“disallowance under section 14A”

DisallowancesSection 14ASection 14A2,288 judgments

The decision most relied on for disallowance under section 14A is CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. (322 ITR 158), cited in 2,228 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on disallowance under section 14A

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT
402 ITR 640 · 2018 · Supreme Court
1,596
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A is not automatic and requires the Assessing Officer to record satisfaction before applying Rule 8D. Only investments yielding exempt income are considered for disallowance, irrespective of their strategic nature.

Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT
378 ITR 33 · 2015 · High Court
1,569
citing judgments

A disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income cannot be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the relevant previous year.

S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT
288 ITR 1 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,484
citing judgments

Interest paid on borrowed funds cannot be disallowed merely because the assessee made interest-free advances, provided those advances were made for business purposes and commercial expediency. The Revenue cannot dictate a businessman's commercial decisions, but the assessee bears the onus to prove the business expediency.

CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.
366 ITR 505 · 2014 · High Court
1,261
citing judgments

When an assessee possesses interest-free funds sufficient to cover investments yielding tax-free income, it is presumed that such investments were made from these interest-free funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court
1,183
citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
165 ITD 27 · 2017 · ITAT
882
citing judgments

No disallowance under section 14A can be made while computing book profits under section 115JB unless the expenditure is debited to the profit and loss account and satisfies clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2).

Judgments citing disallowance under section 14A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2, Ltu, Bengaluru vs. M/S. Robert Bosch Engineering and Business Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 446/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar E, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 115Section 115JSection 237Section 80J

rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we note that that issue of disallowance under section 14A of the Act is covered in favour of the assessee by the order of this Tribunal in own case of the assessee

The National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mumbai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2522/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate &
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(xii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH ‘B', MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Maheshwari Financial Services Ltd, Udaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Delhi-2, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2249/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi06 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2019-20 Maheshwari Financial Vs. Pcit(Central), Services Ltd., Delhi-2, Pi-1, River View Apartment, New Delhi Patho Ki Magri, Rajasthan Pan :Aaacm9185B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

causing prejudice to interest of the Revenue, on the ground that there was no inquiry or verification carried out so as to invoke disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 4. Mr. Yadav vehemently supports the impugned revision order that the PCIT herein has only restored the assessment back

Dipinder Sandhu, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 23(1), Mumbai

ITA 5191/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 14A

file any further details. Further from the perusal of AO's order we notice that the AO while making the disallowance under section 14A r.w.r. 8D has not recorded any findings on merits and has simply made the addition for the reason that the assessee has not made any disallowance

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 1(1), Nungambakkam vs. Idfc Limited, Teynampet

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 817/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 35DSection 80C

ora siete after, <P aorte, tag! IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI HPS. cel, ae yews ved

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Icici Prudential Life Insurance Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3003/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Ms. Arati VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 28Section 44

return?" 8.1. The relevant facts in brief are that in the return of income, the Assessee did not offer any disallowance under Section 14A of the Act since the Assessee was of the view that the provisions of Section 14A of the Act would not be applicable to a company ... business of life insurance. While framing the assessment, the Assessing Officer rejected the aforesaid contention of the Assessee and proceeded to make disallowance under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, observing that the Assessee had itself claimed exemption in respect

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai. vs. Icici Prudential Life Insurance Limited, Mumbai

ITA 2384/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2020-21
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 28Section 44

return?" 8.1. The relevant facts in brief are that in the return of income, the Assessee did not offer any disallowance under Section 14A of the Act since the Assessee was of the view that the provisions of Section 14A of the Act would not be applicable to a company ... business of life insurance. While framing the assessment, the Assessing Officer rejected the aforesaid contention of the Assessee and proceeded to make disallowance under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, observing that the Assessee had itself claimed exemption in respect

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Ambalal Sarabhi Enterprises Limited, Vadodara

ITA 2067/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

84 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A “, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Ambalal Sarabhi Enterprises Limited, Vadodara

ITA 2066/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

84 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A “, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Baroda

ITA 1783/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

84 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A “, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Baroda

ITA 1782/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

84 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A “, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Vadodara

ITA 1594/AHD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

84 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A “, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1)(1), Baroda

ITA 1291/AHD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

84 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A “, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1)(1), Baroda

ITA 1290/AHD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

84 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A “, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

ITA 1773/AHD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

84 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A “, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

ITA 1772/AHD/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

84 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “A “, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का

Bse Limited, Fort, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 2(1)(1), Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 2662/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SMT MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 201Section 250Section 37(1)

account. On reading of the assessment order, it is patent and obvious that the Assessing Officer has rejected assessee's computation of disallowance under section 14A, simply for the reason that it is not in terms with the method prescribed under rule 8D. In view of the aforesaid, we have ... exempt income. In fact, the assessee has also accepted this factual position and has submitted a working before the Assessing Officer computing the disallowance under section 14A of the Act at Rs.15,95,064. The judicial precedents on the issue including the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court

ACIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bse Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 2440/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SMT MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 201Section 250Section 37(1)

account. On reading of the assessment order, it is patent and obvious that the Assessing Officer has rejected assessee's computation of disallowance under section 14A, simply for the reason that it is not in terms with the method prescribed under rule 8D. In view of the aforesaid, we have ... exempt income. In fact, the assessee has also accepted this factual position and has submitted a working before the Assessing Officer computing the disallowance under section 14A of the Act at Rs.15,95,064. The judicial precedents on the issue including the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court

Vedant Fashions Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 530/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.530/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Vedant Fashions Ltd...………………........………………....Appellant Sdf-1, A-501, A-502, 4Th Floor, 19 Canal South Road, Paridhan Garment Park, Kolkata – 700015. [Pan: Aabcv4646B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(2), Kolkata.….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Pradip Kr. Biswas, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 29, 2024 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.01.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 21, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.3084417870/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny By Issuing Notice U/S 143(2) Under Cass, Consequent To This, Notices U/S 142(1) & 133(6) Of The Act Were Issued To The Assessee Seeking Clarification & Verification Of The Deduction Claimed In The Return. During The Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Observed That The Assessee Had Claimed A Deduction Of Rs.2,98,57,165/- Towards Health & Education Cess. The Assessing Officer Disallowed This Deduction Holding That The Health And

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 40

before applying the theory of apportionment, the AO needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the kind of the assessee, suo moto disallowance under Section 14A was not correct. It will be in those cases where the assessee in his return has himself apportioned

Dsp Hmk Holdings Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy .CIT Circle 2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4046/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2017-18 Dsp Hmk Holdings Pvt. Dy. Cit- Circle 2(1)(2) Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, 11Th Floor, M. K. Marg, Mafatlal Centre, Vs. Mumbai- 400020. Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. Pan: Aaach1037K Appellant : Respondent

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(2)

03/06/2019 and ought to have accepted the said disallowance. c) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the additional disallowance under section 14A at Rs. 9,79,36,390/- as determined by the learned Assessing Officer in as much as the learned Assessing Officer has misconstrued ... only those investments in relation to income which does not form part of total income viz. tax free investments to ascertain the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D. d) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule