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

Idbi Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 2193/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2193/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Idbi Bank Ltd. Asst. Cit, Large Tax Payers Unit, बनाम/ 28Th Floor, Centre-1, Wtc Complex, Idbi Tower, Wtc Complex, 7Th Floor, Taxation Cell, Cuffee Parade, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005 Vs. Mumbai-400 005 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci 1105 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Satish Modi ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. C. S. Naik & Shri Bhanwar Singh Ratnoo सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.3.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 16.6.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order By The Ld. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai Dated 12.12.2012 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2004-05, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R/W S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. In The Ground So Raised, The Assessee Is Aggrieved For Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Disallowance Made U/S. 14A While Computing Book Profit U/S.115Jb Of The Act. The Assessee Is Also Aggrieved For Interest Levied U/S. 234D Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Satish ModiFor Respondent: Shri B. C. S. Naik &
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 211Section 234DSection 40

Cmi Fpe Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2334/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2334/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Cmi Fpe Limited Asst. Cit-Ltu, World Trade बनाम/ Centre-I, 28Th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mehta House, Plot No. 64, Road No. 13, Midc, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 005 Vs. Mumbai-400 093 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacf 0252 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K. K. Ved ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Pandian सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 17.03.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 10.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 12.12.2012, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 19.12.2011. 2. The Only Issue Arising In The Instant Appeal Is With Regard To The Confirmation Of The Disallowance Toward Provision For Loss On Contracts Made By The Assessee In Its’ Accounts For Rs.125.39 Lacs. The Assessee Is A Domestic Company & Its Principal

For Appellant: Shri K. K. VedFor Respondent: Shri S. Pandian
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 145