← All Phrases

“disallowance of interest expenditure”

DisallowancesSection 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(iii)785 judgments

The decision most relied on for disallowance of interest expenditure is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,118 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on disallowance of interest expenditure

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.

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.

South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT
438 ITR 1 · 2021 · Supreme Court
508
citing judgments

The mixed fund theory is affirmed, holding that no disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A can be made if the assessee possesses sufficient non-interest bearing funds, such as capital and reserves, to cover investments made in tax-free securities.

CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.
410 ITR 466 · 2019 · Supreme Court
501
citing judgments

When mixed funds are available, interest-free advances are presumed to be made from the assessee's own interest-free funds, preventing disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii). This principle also applies to section 14A disallowance, where interest expenditure is not disallowed if surplus funds are available and no direct nexus is established with borrowed funds for investments earning exempt income.

CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd.
254 ITR 377 · 2002 · High Court
417
citing judgments

When there is a nexus between an expenditure and the purpose of business, incurred on grounds of commercial expediency, the Revenue cannot question its reasonableness or assume the role of the businessman to compel profit maximization. This principle applies even if the business is not that of the assessee itself.

HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT
383 ITR 529 · 2016 · High Court
408
citing judgments

Where an assessee has sufficient interest-free funds, investments yielding exempt income are presumed to be made out of such funds, precluding disallowance of related interest expenditure under section 14A.

Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
379 ITR 347 · 2015 · Supreme Court
361
citing judgments

The Revenue cannot substitute its judgment for that of a businessman regarding the necessity or reasonableness of an expenditure. If an expense is incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes, it is deductible, and the Revenue cannot question its commercial expediency.

Judgments citing disallowance of interest expenditure

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Eluru vs. The Andhra Sugars Limited, Tanuku

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 380/VIZ/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 380/Viz/2019 (धनिाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Andhra Sugars Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-1, Tanuku. Eluru. Pan: Aaact6357Q (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. No. 140/Viz/2019 [आयक अपील सं. से उत्पन्न / Arising Out Of I.T.A. No. 380/Viz/2019(A.Y. 2012-13)] M/S. Andhra Sugars Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Tanuku. Income Tax, Circle-1, Pan: Aaact6357Q Eluru. अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca प्रत्यार्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I

erroneous in law and on facts. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance of interest expenditure to exempt dividend income made by the AO U/s. 14A read with Rule 8D of IT Rules. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated ... restored.” 5. Grounds No. 1, 13 and 14 are general in nature and need not adjudication. 6. Grounds No. 2 & 3 relates to disallowance of interest expenditure in relation to exempt dividend income U/s. 14A r.w.r 8D of the IT Rules amounting to Rs. 1,10,52,654/-. On this

Pankaj Shukla, Varanasi vs. ITO Ward 3, Gurgaon

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1818/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.1818/िद"ी/2024 (िन.व. 2016-17) Pankaj Shukla, Kachwa Road Crossing, Thatra, Uttar Pradesh 221301 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aqkps-0678-Q बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Shankar Chowk Road, Phase V, Udyog Vihar, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Sector-19, Gurugram, Haryana 122016 अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Navin C. Agrawal, Chartered Accountant "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 07/03/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 06/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-2, Gurgaon (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 30.10.2019, For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Shri Navin C. Agrawal, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submits That The Solitary Issue Raised By The Assessee In Appeal Is With Regard To Disallowance Of Interest Expenditure Rs.3,11,520/-. 2.1. Narrating Facts Of The Case, He Submitted That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing, Trading & Export Of Woolen Carpets. The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri Navin C. Agrawal, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

Agrawal, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the solitary issue raised by the assessee in appeal is with regard to disallowance of interest expenditure Rs.3,11,520/-. 2.1. Narrating facts of the case, he submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing, trading and export ... below examined. The short issue for consideration before the Tribunal is with regard to disallowance of expenditure Rs.3,11,520/-. The AO has disallowed aforesaid interest expenditure holding that the assessee has diverted funds for non business purposes. 4 5. The stand of assessee is that the interest expenditure claimed

Involute Engineering Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 12(2), New Delhi

The appeals is allowed

ITA 6885/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2015-16 Involute Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, E-30, Anand Niketan, Circle-12(2), Basement, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 001. Pan: Aaacs2041N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Arora, Ca; Ms Pallavi Sharma, Ca & Shri Jeetan Nagpal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.05.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-22, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’, For Short) In Appeal No.208/18-19/Cit(A)-22, New Delhi Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 27.12.2017, Respectively, Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The Dcit, Circle-12(2), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Arora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

while ground no. 4 and 5 are consequential so needs no separate adjudication. 3. Ground No. 2: The ground arises out of the disallowance of interest expenditure. During the impugned year, Rs. 8,39,111 has been advanced by the assessee to Planet Herbs Life Sciences Private Limited [‘PHL’], which

Involute Engineering Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 12(2), New Delhi

The appeals is allowed

ITA 6884/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2013-14 Involute Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, E-30, Anand Niketan, Circle-12(2), Basement, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 001. Pan: Aaacs2041N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Arora, Ca; Ms Pallavi Sharma, Ca & Shri Jeetan Nagpal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.05.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-22, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’, For Short) In Appeal No.208/18-19/Cit(A)-22, New Delhi Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 18.03.2016, Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The Dcit, Circle- 12(2), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Arora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

capital nature. The ground deserves to be sustained. ITAs No.6884/Del/2019 8. Ground No. 7: The issue arises out of the disallowance of interest expenditure. During the impugned year, the Appellant has granted interest-free loan amounting to Rs. 3,10,39,031/- to Planet Herbs Life Sciences Private Limited [hereinafter