← 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

ACIT Circle 1, Trichy vs. Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd., Dalmiapuram

ITA 3158/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

made out in favour of the assessee. We have also noted that judicial precedents relied upon also support the view that no disallowance under section 14A read with Rule-8D(ii) is permissible in cases where the assessee had surplus own funds. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that

ACIT Circle 1, Trichy vs. Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd., Dalmiapuram

ITA 3157/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

made out in favour of the assessee. We have also noted that judicial precedents relied upon also support the view that no disallowance under section 14A read with Rule-8D(ii) is permissible in cases where the assessee had surplus own funds. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that

Uflex Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 2, Noida

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 5157/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Smt. Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Uflex Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, 305, 3Rd Floor, Pamposh Enclave, Central Circle-2, Greater Kailash-I, Noida New Delhi-1100 48 Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aaacf0109J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

under: "5.1 Since no satisfaction has been recorded by the Assessing Officer as per the mandate of section 14A (2), then no disallowance under Section 14A can be made and accordingly, disallowance worked out by the Assessing Officer under Rule 8D is deleted. In the result, grounds

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata vs. Techno Electric & Engineering Company Ltd, Uttar Pradesh

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1982/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

investments. The investments made in SPVs are subsidiaries and other current investments were yielding taxable income and thus are not subject matter of disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The SPVs were having their own infrastructure to manage their respective entities. 6.1 The appellant has received dividend

Bank of India, Mumbai vs. The ACIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1397/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

Vikunj Real Estate Private Limited, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3179/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Sunder Mangla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 41(1)

section 14A disallowance was very much there before Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings and Assessing Officer made no addition on account of disallowance under section 14A, reopening of assessment on ground that disallowance under section 14A had escaped assessment was not justified INCOME TAX: Where assessee during course of assessment

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. M/S Bright Buildtech Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

ITA 1244/DEL/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2025

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijeet Kumar, Sr. DR

provisions of sec 14A was made and referred internal page no. 43 of the impugned order. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance under section 14A by holding that the provision was not applicable to investments made in the said financial years. (iv) With regard to the balance investment ... investments. It is also pertinent to note that, as in earlier years, sufficient interest-free funds were available with the assessee. Hence, no disallowance under Section 14A was warranted. (v) That the Assessing Officer, while making the addition, has failed to appreciate that the total interest debited in the profit

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. M/S Bright Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 1240/DEL/2025[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2025

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijeet Kumar, Sr. DR

provisions of sec 14A was made and referred internal page no. 43 of the impugned order. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance under section 14A by holding that the provision was not applicable to investments made in the said financial years. (iv) With regard to the balance investment ... investments. It is also pertinent to note that, as in earlier years, sufficient interest-free funds were available with the assessee. Hence, no disallowance under Section 14A was warranted. (v) That the Assessing Officer, while making the addition, has failed to appreciate that the total interest debited in the profit

The New Great Eastern Spinning and Weaving Company Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5837/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 14A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata vs. Bentec India Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1776/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Central Circle -1(1), Kolkata.…..………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Bentec India Ltd………………. ………..…………...……………………..…..Respondent Phase-Ii, Kasba Industrial Estates, Plot No.11, Kol-700107.. [Pan: Aabcb0647G] Appearances By: Pradeep Dung Dung, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Manish Tiwari, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 02, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 17, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.11.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Kolkata [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 186 Days. The Revenue Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Petition For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 250Section 68

read with Rule 8D, we find that there was no dividend income and no separate expenses were incurred during the year and the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D does not apply in absence of any exempt income derived in the relevant previous year

Basant Properties Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1765/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

Section 14ASection 250

Rs.1,98,969/- as per Rule 8D with reference to dividend yielding investments has been approved and it has been held that, the disallowance under section 14A as per rule 8D is to be computed by taking into consideration only those shares which had yielded dividend income in year under ... High Court has held as follows:- 3 Basant Properties Ltd 11. The next substantial question of law is with regard to the disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The tribunal after noting several decisions has directed the assessing officer to compute the disallowance as per Rule 8D by taking

ACIT, Mumbai vs. Reliance Power Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3989/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Acit-15(3)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 460, 4Th Floor, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Vs. Revenue-अपीलार्थी / Appellant Assessee By Revenue By Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement

Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

earning of exempt income, and further was not satisfied with the basis of the amount quantified by the appellant for making suo-moto disallowance under section 14A for the reasons as stated in the assessment order. In this regard, the AO has also placed reliance on certain judicial decisions ... directed to be deleted. However, the AO is directed to verify this computation filed by the appellant and thereafter make such disallowance under section 14A of the Act as per the principles laid down in the order of Hon'ble ITAT in case of the appellant vide ITAT order

JCIT(OSD) Circle 2.3.1, Mumbai vs. Rajesh Estates and Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1674/MUM/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2025

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

Section 10Section 115JSection 143Section 14A

also in Rare Township Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice calling upon the assessee to explain as to why disallowance under section 14A should not be made. In response, the assessee submitted that it had not earned any exempt income during the relevant previous year ... loss from a partnership firm could not be equated with exempt income and that in the absence of any positive exempt income, no disallowance under section 14A was permissible. Reliance was placed on several judicial precedents in support of this proposition. 6. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), after considering the submissions

The Pimpalgaon Merchants Co.Op. Bank Ltd., Nashik vs. ACIT Circle-1, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2243/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Hincon Holdings Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 15(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2961/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainhincon Holdings Ltd Vs. Ito, Ward 15(2)(1) Hincon House, Lbs Marg Mumbai. Vikhroli (W), Mumbai – 400 083 Pan/Gir No. Aaach2592M (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 45

appeal. Being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Appellant preferred this appeal before Your Honour. Proposition in brief A. Disallowance under section 14A - Rs. 17,23,096 4. During the year under consideration, the Appellant earned dividend income of Rs. 11,93,263 from investments made ... appended herewith as Annexure 1. For earning the above dividend income, no direct expenses were incurred by the Appellant. Hence, no suo-moto disallowance under section 14A was made by the Appellant. 5. The Id. AO in para 4 of his order, has stated that the provisions of section 14A

DCIT Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Aaykar Bhavan Vejalpur vs. Symphony Limited, Bodakdev

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of

ITA 1660/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Symphony Ltd: Asst. Year : 2020-21
Section 14ASection 250Section 270A

81/Ahd/2025 Assessee: Symphony Ltd: Asst. Year : 2020-21 - 2 - 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds in its cross objection: Disallowance under section 14A of the Income-tax Act 1961 ('the Act') read with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules.1962 ('the Rules') 1. On the facts ... circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Assessing officer ('Ld. AO') erred in making an additional disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules amounting to INR 3,11,29,516. 2. On the facts, in the circumstances of the case

Srf Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant / Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 5618/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 80Section 92C

Crores which is 473.38 times of the value of average tax free investments, thus warranting no disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 66.0 Without prejudice to above grounds, the Ld. DRP and consequently the Ld. AO while making the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, have erred in taking

Srf Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-10(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1449/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 80Section 92C

Crores which is 473.38 times of the value of average tax free investments, thus warranting no disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 66.0 Without prejudice to above grounds, the Ld. DRP and consequently the Ld. AO while making the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, have erred in taking

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-10(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1448/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 80Section 92C

Crores which is 473.38 times of the value of average tax free investments, thus warranting no disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 66.0 Without prejudice to above grounds, the Ld. DRP and consequently the Ld. AO while making the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, have erred in taking

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 4539/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

profits under section 115JB (MAT) of the Act, 1961, by making an addition of Rs. 1,17,18,925/- on account of enhanced disallowance under section 14A rwr 8D2(ii). 17. The AO, while completing the assessment, enhanced the book profit under section 115JB by adding back the disallowance computed ... case of Bhushan Steel [IT Appeal No. 593 of 2015] in which the HC upheld the decision of the Tribunal in holding that disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D cannot be added while computing book profits as per section 115JB as Explanation to that section does not specifically