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

Golden Goenka Credit Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr. CIT (Central) - 2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 787/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2021-22 Golden Goenka Credit Pvt. Ltd.……..………………….……….……….……Appellant 24 Magma House, 10Th Floor, 24, Park Street, Park Centre, W.B. – 700016.. [Pan: Aaccr3964K] Vs. Pcit (Central) -2, Kolkata…………...…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Miraj D Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. P N Barnwal, Cit - Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 05, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2025 Of The Principal Cit (Central)-2, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Pcit”) Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2021–22. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2021-22 Showing Loss Of Rs.10,36,29,610/- & Deemed Total Income U/S 115Jb Of The Act At Nil. A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Of The Act Was Conducted On 18.12.2021 In The Cases Of Raj Group & Others By Dit(Inv.). The Return Of Income Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & After Going Over The Submission Made By The Assessee & Notices U/S 143(2) & Golden Goenka Credit Pvt. Ltd 142(1) Were Issued. However, The Assessing Officer Assessed Total Income Of The Assessee At A Loss Of Rs.10,36,29,610/- & Further Assessed The Income Of Book Profit U/S 115Jb Of The Act As Nil. The Ld. Pcit By Exercising His Revisional Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act Has Found That The Discrepancies On The Following Issues:

Section 115JSection 132Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 263