Section 14A of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.14

Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 14 (Income not forming part of total income and expenditure in relation to such income) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 14 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 14A is CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. (322 ITR 158), cited in 2,228 of the 15,875 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 14A

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

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.

Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT
193 ITR 321 · 1992 · Supreme Court
1,695
citing judgments

The principle of consistency applies in tax matters, meaning a fundamental aspect found to be true in one assessment year should not be changed in a subsequent year if the order was not challenged.

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.

S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT
288 ITR 1 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,484
citing judgments

Interest paid on borrowed funds cannot be disallowed merely because the assessee made interest-free advances, provided those advances were made for business purposes and commercial expediency. The Revenue cannot dictate a businessman's commercial decisions, but the assessee bears the onus to prove the business expediency.

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.

Judgments on Section 14A

Senbo Engineering Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 499/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Feb 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 499/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Senbo Engineering Limited Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Circle-12(2), Kolkata 87, Lenin Sarani Kolkata - 700013 [Pan : Aadcs6138B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 28/07/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Limited Company. Income Of Rs.2,53,38,150/- Declared In The Return Filed On 07/11/2017 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. Case Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass Followed For Serving Of Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings The First Issue Dealt By The Ld. Assessing Officer Was Regarding Cessation Of Liability U/S 41 Of The Act. The Ld. Assessing Officer Noted That In The 3Cd Report, The Auditor Has Mentioned About The Application Of Section U/S 41(1) Of The Act For The Unpaid Liability Of Rs.47,19,644/-. The Ld. Assessing Officer Also Examined The Other Outstanding Liabilities & Noticed That Regarding Outstanding Credit Of Rs.1,13,76,781/-, Pertaining To Ten Parties, Assessee Failed To Provide Any Detail About The Transactions Carried Out With These Parties I.E.

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 41Section 41(1)

Mr. Virendra Singhvi, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 31, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 316/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 316/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Virendra Singhvi A.C.I.T., Circle - 31, Kolkata Singhvi International Vs 505, 2/7, Vasundhara Building Sarat Bose Road Kolkata - 700020 [Pan : Ajwps2093N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kumar Khanna, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02/01/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 09, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 22/11/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Is Time Barred By 11 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Petition For Condonation Of Delay Duly Explaining The Reasons For Delay Thereby. After Going Through The Same, We Are Convinced That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal In Time. In View Of This, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1.For That The Honorable Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) - 9 Was Quite Unjustified By Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 278177/- (Rupees Two Lakh Seventy- Eight Thousand One Hundred Seventy-Seven) U/S 14 A Though The Appellant Had Submitted That There Was No Expenditure Incurred By The Appellant.

For Appellant: Shri Kumar Khanna, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 14Section 14ASection 250