“disallowance u/s 14A”

DisallowancesSection 14ASection 14A2,938 judgments

The decision most relied on for disallowance u/s 14A is CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. (223 Taxmann 130), cited in 579 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on disallowance u/s 14A

CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd.

223 Taxmann 130 · 2014 · High Court

579

citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D is not warranted if the assessee has not earned any exempt income in the relevant assessment year.

CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd.

330 ITR 175 · 2011 · High Court

207

citing judgments

Disallowances made under various sections, such as for PF/ESIC contributions, result in an increase in business profits, and these enhanced profits are eligible for deduction under Sections 10A and 10AA. Similarly, gains from foreign exchange fluctuations directly linked to export sales are also eligible for deduction under Section 10A.

Cargo Motors (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

145 Taxmann.com 641 · 2022 · High Court

citing judgments

The disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, particularly Rule 8D(iii) for administrative expenses, should only consider investments that have actually yielded exempt income during the relevant assessment year. Section 14A empowers the Assessing Officer to determine expenditure related to income not forming part of total income.

Sobha Developers Ltd. v. DCIT

125 Taxmann.com 72 · 2021 · High Court

citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A is a notional disallowance and cannot be added back while computing Book Profits under section 115JB for Minimum Alternate Tax purposes.

Tata Industries Ltd. v. ITO

181 TTJ 600 · 2016 · ITAT

citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the exempt income earned by the assessee. Even if interest expenditure is considered, it cannot be solely attributed to earning exempt dividend income as investors also consider potential capital gains.

PCIT v. J.J. Glastronics (P.) Ltd.

139 Taxmann.com 375 · 2022 · High Court

citing judgments

Additions made under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, read with Rule 8D, cannot be considered for computing book profit under Section 115JB of the Act.

M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. ACIT

38 DTR 282 · 2010 · Reported

citing judgments

Section 14A of the Income-tax Act is not applicable to insurance businesses governed by specific provisions of Section 44 and Schedule 1. Profit on sale of investments by insurance companies is not taxable, especially after the deletion of sub-rule (b) of Rule 5 of the First Schedule.

PCIT v. Dipesh Lalchand Shah

143 Taxmann.com 419 · 2022 · High Court

citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A cannot be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income in the relevant assessment year. This applies even if the assessee has made investments in shares or has income from a partnership that is negative.

Judgments citing disallowance u/s 14A

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Prudential Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result both the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2936/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)

during the year, but expenses debited to Profit and Loss account under the head ‘Finance Cost’ is of Rs.23,271/- only. And no disallowances u/s 14A was made by the assessee in its computation of income. 8. When the assessee was asked to substantiate, assessee failed to submit any submissions ... rate of 1% of average of investment in non-current investment during the assessment year 2016-17 & 2017-18 and accordingly, determined the disallowance u/s 14A to the extent of Rs.41,75,274/-. 9. Aggrieved with the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before NFAC, Delhi and filed the detailed

M/S. Topgrain Corporate Service Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2276/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

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

Section 10Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 11Section 115JSection 12Section 14Section 14ASection 234BSection 234C

assessee. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the contentions of the assessee with regard to additions to book profit u/s 115JB and disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. 4. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before us. The Ld. AR had challenged the very impugned order thereby submitting that ... completely ignored the fact that the decision passed in ITA No.502/Del/2012 dated 16.06.2017, wherein the Special Division Bench has categorically held that disallowance u/s 14A could not be added back while computing book profits u/s 115JB. The ld. AR further submits that the ld. CIT(A) has erred

DCIT Circle 2.3.1, Mumbai, Mumba vs. Trent Limited, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5245/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 250

order of the Ld.CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to adopt the suomoto disallowance made by the assessee for computing the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. Similarly, in another order of the Co-ordinate Bench

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Trent Limited, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5244/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & Dcit Trent Limited, 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar G-Block, Plot No. C Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. 60 Trent House, Mumbai-400 020 Beside City Bank Bandra K Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl1838J (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By Shri Ritesh Misra, Ld. Dr Assessee By Shri Nikhil Tiwari, Ld. Ar Date Of Hearing 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.02.2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 250

order of the Ld.CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to adopt the suomoto disallowance made by the assessee for computing the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. 17. Similarly, in another order of the Co-ordinate Bench

Ambuja Cements Limited, Mumbai vs. PCIT, Mumbai-3, Mumbai

ITA 3474/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Sourabh Soparkar, AR (virtually appear)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, (CIT-DR)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

expenses of Rs. 1,82,21,8677/-, debited to profit and loss account which related to this exempt income and disallowed u/s 14A of the Act. In response, the assessee filed a comprehensive reply on 26.09.2022 placing on record an Expert's report explaining how the amount of suo motu ... discretion has been provided to the Commissioner in this context. 8.3 In the instant case, in so far as the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is concerned, we have examined the record qua submissions made by both sides. It is noticed from page no.20-24

ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Engenrin Hydro Power Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 831/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(3)

particular year has not earned any exempt income. Therefore, held that the appellant has interest expenditure of Rs.3,84,42,000/-, has made disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r.8D of Rs,3,84,42,000/- and added back to the total income. The A.O. had also made similar adjustments to book profit ... appeal before the Tribunal. Ms.Aditi Goyal, Ld.Sr.AR for the Revenue, submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions made towards disallowance u/s 14A of the Act for Rs.3,84,42,000/- even though CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014 is very clear, in as much

ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Engenrin Hydro Power Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 830/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(3)

ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Engenrin Hydro Power Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 829/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(3)

ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Engenrin Hydro Power Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 828/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(3)

Tata Chemicals Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 2 (3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 7912/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh Joshi a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 35Section 43BSection 80Section 91Section 92Section 92A(3)

length interest on the preference share capital of the Associated Enterprise, subscribed by the Appellant, by recharacterising preference shares as a loan. 2. Disallowance u/s 14A :- Rs. 4,86,94,253/- The learned Assessing Officer erred in computing the disallowance u/s 14A as per Rule 8D amounting ... Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee stands dismissed. 5. The next ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee relate to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. 5.1 The facts in brief qua the issue in dispute are that the assessee shown investment of Rs.870.63 crores

Kamleshkumar Babalal Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 1 Gandhinagar, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2476/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234A

that the assessee filed his Return of Income admitting total income of Rs. 66,10,100/-. During the assessment proceedings, the A.O. made disallowance u/s. 14A of Rs.66.11,080/- and addition on account of outstanding Sundry Creditors being treated as liability no more payable of Rs.33,72,05,045/-. Thus ... considering the said facts the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal on account of delay in filing the said appeal. GOA No.2 Disallowance u/s 14A worth Rs 66,11,080/-: The Ld. CIT(A) not justified in confirming the addition made by the Ld. ITO by Invoked Rule

Kamleshkumar Babalal Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 1 Gandhinagar, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2461/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234A

ACIT, Mumbai vs. Raheja Universal Pvt Limited, Mumbai

ITA 5344/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 36(2)

facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is right in law, in justifying in holding that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income, in contravention of the CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 and without appreciating the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court ... firm and dividend income of Rs. 13,038/- from shares. The appellant has relied on a slew of judgments to state that no disallowance u/s 14A was called for. 11.2. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PC/T vs. Ballarpur Industries

Doubledot Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 4(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 5514/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosaindoubledot Finance Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer- 1St Floor, Kohinoor City 4(1)(4) Mall, Premier Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Kurla (W), Mumbai Road Mumbai. Pan/Gir No:Aqepd9599B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 37

following grounds: 1 Doubledot Finance Ltd., Mumbai. 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act to the extent of Rs. 12,62,554/-. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in partly ... made by the Ld.AO. Although during the appellate proceedings Ld. CIT(A) had accepted the stand of the assessee to the extent that disallowance u/s 14A of the Act had to be computed by considering only the investments from which exempt income was earned. But confirmed the disallowance

Elegant Marbles and Grani Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 6(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7415/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarelegant Marbles & Grani Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Industries Limited Tax, Circle 6(2)(2), Mumbai Room No. 506, 5Th Floor Aayakar Raghuvanshi Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Bhawan, M.K. Road, Mumbai Parel, Mumbai-400013 400020 Pan: Aaace1584C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shreyash Shah, Respondent By : Shri Ritesh Misra (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing : 27/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/01/2026 O R D E R Per: Anikesh Banerjee (Jm): The Instant Appeal Of The Assessee Filed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [For Brevity ‘The Ld. Cit(A)], Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (For Brevity ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2017-18, Date Of Order 06.11.2025. The Impugned Order Emanated From The Order Of The Ld. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle.-6(2)(2), Mumbai (For Brevity The “Ld. Ao”), Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Date Of Order 12.12.2019. 2

For Appellant: Shri Shreyash ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250

Industries Ltd. disallowance, 'irrespective' of the fact whether any such income has been earned during the financial year or not the working for disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D.” 6. We heard the rival submissions and considered the documents available in record. The assessee has voluntarily disallowed during filing of return

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Trent Limited, Mumbai

In the result, these grounds of appeal are

ITA 5242/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing) Trent Limited Dcit-2(3)(1), Mumbai 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Bombay House, Mumbai, Vs Maharashtra – 400001. Maharishi Karve Road, [Pan: Aaacl1838J] Mumbai-400020. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Dcit-2(3)(1), Mumbai Trent Limited 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs G Block, Plot No. C 60, Trent House, Maharishi Karve Road, Beside City Bank, Bandra K Complex, Mumbai-400020. Bandra E Mumbai – 400051. [Pan: Aaacl1838J] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 153Section 254(1)Section 40A(2)Section 92BSection 92C

assessing officer while passing the draft assessment order made following various additions/ disallowance. Sl. No. Nature of addition / disallowance Amount 1 Disallowance u/s 14A & added to book profit Rs. 8,12,71,939/- u/s 115JB 2 Interest expenses Rs. 3,37,24,778/- 3 Indirect administrative expenses

Trent Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, these grounds of appeal are

ITA 5166/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 153Section 254(1)Section 40A(2)Section 92BSection 92C

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Lighthouse Learning Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5433/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 14ASection 250Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that no disallowance u/s 14A could be made as the assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year? 7. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... reproduced herein above. 5 Lighthouse Learning Pvt Ltd, Mumbai. a. Disallowance of amortization of Goodwill of Rs. 209,42,61,048/-. b. Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act r.w.r 8D of the IT Rules, 1962 of Rs. 8,10,655/- 6. Ground No. 1 to 5 these grounds raised

Omprakash Shrikisan Kasat, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(4), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3102/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.3102/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Omprakash Shrikisan Kasat, Vs. Ito, Ward-3(4), Pune. Shree Bunglow, Sneh Paradise, Ram Baug Colony, Kothrud, Pune- 411038. Pan : Abfpk3563L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Ajitesh Kumar Meena Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.09.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A), Mysore [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Duly Supported By An Affidavit That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After Hearing Ld. Dr, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeal.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajitesh Kumar Meena

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40

Rs.19,65,871/-. The above assessed income includes disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act of Rs.10,44,137/- and disallowance u/s 14A of Rs.17,868/-. 5. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee remained

DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Pune vs. Kakade Infrastructure Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2277/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.2275 & 2277/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Dcit, V Kakade Infrastructure Private Limited,20Th Floor, A Wing, Central Circle-2(2), S Pune. Marathon Futurx, N.M.Joshi Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400013. Pan: Aadck5852G Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Jay Bhansali (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2013-14 A.Y.2014-15 Both Dated 30.07.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 28.03.2016 & 30.12.2016 Respectively. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

consideration. Therefore, in view of the above decisions, since no exempt income was earned or receivable by the appellant during AY 2013-14, disallowance u/s 14A cannot be sustained. Therefore, the addition u/s 14A deserves to be and accordingly deleted. However, as held in the above decision ... taxmann.com 118/234 Taxman 761/378 ITR 33 has held that if there is no exempt income, there can be no question of making any disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Holcim India