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

Nakodaltd., Surat vs. The Dy.CIT., Cent.Circle-1, Surat

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

ITA 787/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.787/Ahd/2011 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2007-08 Nakoda Textile Industries Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-1, Surat. 738, Ajanta Shopping Centre, Ring Road, Surat. [Pan: Aaacn 7282 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri H.R.Vepari – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By: Shri O.P.Singh – Cit-Dr & Smt.Anupama Singla - Ld.Sr.Dr 01.05.2019 सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 02.05.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per H.S.Sidhu, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Impugned 1. Order Dated 24.12.2010 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income (Appeals)-Ii, Ahmedabad For The Assessment Year 2007-08 On The Following Grounds:- “(I) Calculation Of Income U/S.115Jb Of The Act:- (1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & As Per Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Erred In Not Granting Lower Of Brought Forward Unabsorbed Book Depreciation Of Rs.3,70,99,277/- & Brought Forward Unabsorbed Book Loss Of Rs.6,10,02,257/- In Terms Of Clause (Iii) Of Explanation To Section 115Jb(2). (2) The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Erred In Misconstruing Provisions Of Companies Act, 1956 & The Factual Aspects. (Ii) Miscellaneous:- The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter Or Vary Any Of The Grounds Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri H.R.Vepari – CAFor Respondent: Shri O.P.Singh – CIT-DR &
Section 115J

Kamsco Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 345/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 345/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kamsco Industries Pvt. Ltd.....………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant 2, Minto Park Kolkata – 700 027 [Pan : Aabck 3918 P] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Kolkata.......…..…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Senior Counsel & Sri Arvind Agarwal, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Singh, Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 1St, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 4, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 16/01/2018, For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Hon’Ble Jurisdictional High Court In An Appeal Filed By The Assessee In Itat No. 1 Of 2019, G.A. No. 76 Of 2019, In The Case Of Kamsco Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cit, Dt. 22/01/2019, Held As Follows:- “We Appreciate The Valuable Assistance Provided By Mr. Ghoshal, Learned Senior Advocate For The Revenue In Cutting Short The Hearing Of This Matter. We Also Appreciate His Fairness. Mr. Khaitan Learned Senior Advocate For The Appellant Pointed Out, Very Correctly That The Tribunal Has Failed To Determine The Basic Issues That Were Before It, Namely: Whether The Long Term Capital Gain Credited To The Profit & Loss Account & Included In The Computation Of The Book Profit Under Section 115Jb Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Can Be Added A Second Time To Such Book Profit? Secondly, Whether Section 115Jb Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Authorised The Assessing Officer To Add Back To The Book Profit The Sum Of Rs. 273,97,17,182/- Written Off As Irrecoverable By The Debit Of The Profit & Loss Account?

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250