← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Laurus Labs Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, ITA No.121/Hyd/2024 is allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 203/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 201, 202 & 203/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Laurus Labs Limited Income Tax Vs. Visakhapatnam Circle-5(1), Hyderabad [Pan : Aabcl1170C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 121/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 ) Laurus Labs Limited Asst.Commissioner Visakhapatnam Vs. Of Income Tax [Pan : Aabcl1170C] Circle-16(1) Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohd Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sheetal Sarin, LD.DR
Section 14Section 14ASection 32ASection 35

Development P. Ltd (399 ITR 483)(Delhi), learned CIT(A) held that when there is no earning of exempt income, no question of disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. 8. Aggrieved by the disallowance of investment allowance under section 32AD ... Revenue appeal is found to be devoid of merits and accordingly dismissed. 15. Second aspect of Revenue’s appeal is in respect of disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. Factual finding returned by the learned CIT(A) is that during the assessment

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Laurus Labs Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, ITA No.121/Hyd/2024 is allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 202/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 201, 202 & 203/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Laurus Labs Limited Income Tax Vs. Visakhapatnam Circle-5(1), Hyderabad [Pan : Aabcl1170C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 121/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 ) Laurus Labs Limited Asst.Commissioner Visakhapatnam Vs. Of Income Tax [Pan : Aabcl1170C] Circle-16(1) Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohd Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sheetal Sarin, LD.DR
Section 14Section 14ASection 32ASection 35

Development P. Ltd (399 ITR 483)(Delhi), learned CIT(A) held that when there is no earning of exempt income, no question of disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. 8. Aggrieved by the disallowance of investment allowance under section 32AD ... Revenue appeal is found to be devoid of merits and accordingly dismissed. 15. Second aspect of Revenue’s appeal is in respect of disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. Factual finding returned by the learned CIT(A) is that during the assessment

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Laurus Labs Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, ITA No.121/Hyd/2024 is allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 201/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 201, 202 & 203/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Laurus Labs Limited Income Tax Vs. Visakhapatnam Circle-5(1), Hyderabad [Pan : Aabcl1170C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 121/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 ) Laurus Labs Limited Asst.Commissioner Visakhapatnam Vs. Of Income Tax [Pan : Aabcl1170C] Circle-16(1) Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohd Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sheetal Sarin, LD.DR
Section 14Section 14ASection 32ASection 35

Development P. Ltd (399 ITR 483)(Delhi), learned CIT(A) held that when there is no earning of exempt income, no question of disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. 8. Aggrieved by the disallowance of investment allowance under section 32AD ... Revenue appeal is found to be devoid of merits and accordingly dismissed. 15. Second aspect of Revenue’s appeal is in respect of disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. Factual finding returned by the learned CIT(A) is that during the assessment

Laurus Labs Limited, Vishakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA No.121/Hyd/2024 is allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 121/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 201, 202 & 203/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Laurus Labs Limited Income Tax Vs. Visakhapatnam Circle-5(1), Hyderabad [Pan : Aabcl1170C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 121/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 ) Laurus Labs Limited Asst.Commissioner Visakhapatnam Vs. Of Income Tax [Pan : Aabcl1170C] Circle-16(1) Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohd Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sheetal Sarin, LD.DR
Section 14Section 14ASection 32ASection 35

Development P. Ltd (399 ITR 483)(Delhi), learned CIT(A) held that when there is no earning of exempt income, no question of disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. 8. Aggrieved by the disallowance of investment allowance under section 32AD ... Revenue appeal is found to be devoid of merits and accordingly dismissed. 15. Second aspect of Revenue’s appeal is in respect of disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. Factual finding returned by the learned CIT(A) is that during the assessment

Melakandy Puthalath Farook, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-2(1), Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1890/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1890/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Melekandy Puthalath Farook Acit बनाम/ Faraz No.9 Sbi Colony, Corporate Circle-2(1) Vs. Sastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai-600 020. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaapf-2644-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 274

This Court is of the opinion that the only addition in the assessment order framed by Respondent No.1 is in respect of disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The Petitioner has made a disallowance of Rs.3,20,14,010/- which was recomputed by the Assessing Officer at Rs.6 ... well as assessee has used the same details to arrive at different conclusions i.e. differing quantum of disallowances under Section 14A of the Act. This by no stretch of imagination can be held to be ‘misreporting’. 8. This Court also finds that there is not even a whisper

Gujarat Tea Processors & Packers Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 837/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 837/Ahd/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2018-2019 Gujarat Tea Processor & Packers Principal Ltd., बनामVs Commissioner Of . Waghbakri House, Income Tax-1, Opp. Parimal Garden, Ahmedabad. Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacg5594L ( ""यथ" /Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant Assessee By : Shri Yogesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N Dsouza, Cit.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Pcit, Ahmedabad-1, Dated 29.02.2023 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018- 19, Passed In His Revisional Jurisdiction U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N Dsouza, CIT.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

submitted that it be so held now. 3. The learned CIT erred in not appreciating the fact that if at all disallowance under Section 14A needs to be made as per Rule 8D, the correct amount is Rs. 7,15,263 as against of Rs. 48,96,756, worked

DCIT-CC-5(3), Mumbai, Air India, Nariman Point vs. Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3044/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22 Aditya Birla Sunlife Insurance Commissioner Of Income Tax Company Ltd., (A) – 54, 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One World Mumbai Vs. Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Aditya Birla Sunlife Tax – Central Circle – 5(3), Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One Vs. World Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Ronak Doshi, Ca Revenue : Shri Ajay Chandra, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 234BSection 37(1)Section 44Section 69C

that it is not permissible for Assessing Officer to travel beyond section 44 and First Schedule of the Act and cannot made a disallowance under section 14A. No contrary law is brought to our notice, therefore, respectfully following the decision of co-ordinate bench and consistency, ground no.1 ... appeal before the Tribunal. Furthermore, it is submitted that for AY 2008-09 and 2009-10, ld. AO has not made any disallowance under section 14A of the Act, after taking into consideration the submissions of the assessee. 8.1. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision in the case

Aditya Birla Sunlife Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 54, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1828/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22 Aditya Birla Sunlife Insurance Commissioner Of Income Tax Company Ltd., (A) – 54, 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One World Mumbai Vs. Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Aditya Birla Sunlife Tax – Central Circle – 5(3), Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One Vs. World Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Ronak Doshi, Ca Revenue : Shri Ajay Chandra, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 234BSection 37(1)Section 44Section 69C

that it is not permissible for Assessing Officer to travel beyond section 44 and First Schedule of the Act and cannot made a disallowance under section 14A. No contrary law is brought to our notice, therefore, respectfully following the decision of co-ordinate bench and consistency, ground no.1 ... appeal before the Tribunal. Furthermore, it is submitted that for AY 2008-09 and 2009-10, ld. AO has not made any disallowance under section 14A of the Act, after taking into consideration the submissions of the assessee. 8.1. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision in the case