“mixed funds theory”
The decision most relied on for mixed funds theory is South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (438 ITR 1), cited in 508 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on mixed funds theory
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.
The Supreme Court approves the mixed fund theory, holding that no interest disallowance is warranted under section 36(1)(iii) if investments or advances are made from the assessee's own non-interest bearing funds, even when mixed funds are available. This presumption applies when non-interest bearing funds are sufficient to meet the investments.
Where an assessee has mixed funds (both interest-bearing and interest-free funds) and makes an interest-free advance or investment, it is presumed that the interest-free funds were utilized first if they are sufficient to cover such advances or investments. This prevents disallowance of interest on borrowed funds under Section 36(1)(iii).
When an assessee has sufficient interest-free own funds available to make interest-free advances or investments, it is presumed that such advances or investments are made from these interest-free funds, thereby preventing the disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 36(1)(iii).
When an assessee has both borrowed funds and sufficient interest-free own funds, and makes interest-free advances, it is presumed that the advances were made from the own funds, and no interest disallowance is made under Section 36(1)(iii) on the borrowed funds.
Where an assessee has mixed funds (borrowed and interest-free) and makes interest-free advances, it is presumed that such advances are made from interest-free funds if sufficient interest-free funds are available. This principle guides the disallowance of interest on borrowed capital under Section 36(1)(iii) if funds are diverted for non-business purposes without business expediency.
When funds are mixed, interest expenditure relatable to investments in tax-free income is to be computed under the provisions of Rule 8D(2)(ii), applying the theory of apportionment.
Where an assessee has sufficient own funds exceeding its investments, a presumption arises that investments were made out of interest-free funds, preventing disallowance of interest expenses.
