Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.206

Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 206 (Special provision for minimum alternate tax and alternate minimum tax) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 206 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 115JB is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,118 of the 5,494 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 115JB

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.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

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.

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.

CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.
312 ITR 254 · 2009 · Supreme Court
968
citing judgments

Foreign exchange fluctuations, whether gains or losses, are inextricably linked to the underlying business transaction and must be accounted for under the mercantile system. The Supreme Court also affirmed the standard accounting principle of valuing stock at cost or net realisable value, whichever is lower.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders
349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court
956
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT
245 ITR 428 · 2000 · Supreme Court
901
citing judgments

A business liability that has definitely arisen in an accounting year is deductible even if it needs to be quantified and discharged later, as long as its incurring is certain and can be reasonably estimated.

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 on Section 115JB

M/S. Sakarlal Balabhai & Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1713/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Sakarlal Balabhai & Co. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 1001/6, 10Th Floor, Ankush Apartment, Vs Ward 4(1)(1), 10Th Khetwadi Lane, Grant Road, Ahmedabad Mumbai-400004 Pan : Aadcs 0862 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bimlendu Bhusan, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad [“Cit(A) In Short]” Dated 20.09.2019 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under:- “1. Learned Cit(A) Has Neither Discussed Anything Related To The Disallowance Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer Nor Considered Any Grounds Related To That Raised By The Us For Which Actually Appeal Has Been Filed By The Appellant. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Has Claimed That The Appellant Is Involved In Only Investment Activity & Does Not Have Any Business Activity & We Do Not Agree With It.”

For Appellant: Shri Bimlendu Bhusan, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

ACIT, Circle - 6(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Williamson Magor & Company Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2549/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Cir-6(2), M/S. Williamson Magor & Kolkata Co. Ltd. Vs. 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata – 700001. Pan: Aaacw 2369 P (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.7/Kol/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 2549/Kol/2019) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Williamson Magor & Acit, Cir-6(2), Co. Ltd. Kolkata Vs. 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata – 700001. Pan: Aaacw 2369 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri N.S. Saini, Ar & Shri Sonu Agarwal, Fca Respondent By : Shri Amal Kamat, Cit & Shri Raja Sengupta, Acit Date Of Hearing : 21.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.09.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross-Objection Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Kolkata (Hereinafter The [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) Dated 04.09.2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue As Well As Cross-Objection Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: Grounds Of Revenue “Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law In Giving Direction For Re-Computation Of Amount Of Disallowance U/S 14A

For Appellant: Shri N.S. Saini, AR & Shri Sonu Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Amal Kamat, CIT & Shri Raja Sengupta, ACIT
Section 115JSection 14ASection 154Section 250