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

DCIT Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai vs. Kamarajar Port Ltd. (Formerly Known As M/S. Ennore Port Ltd.), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2450/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2450/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013 - 14 The Dcit, Kamarajar Port Ltd., Corporate Circle – 4(2), Vs. (Formerly Known As Ennore Port Chennai – 34. Ltd.,) 4Th Floor, Super Speciality Diabetic Centre (Erstwhile Dlb Building), Rajaji Salai, Chennai -600 001. Pan: Aaace 9013G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Sudharshan, A.C.A सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 31.10.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Chennai, In Ita No.30/Cit(A)-6/2016-17 Dated 18.06.2018. The Assessment Was Framed By The Acit, Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2012-13 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 21.03.2016. 2. The First Issue In This Appeal Of Revenue Is Against Eh Order Of Cit(A) Deleting The Disallowance Of Expenses Relatable To Exempt Income Made By Ao By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 14A R.W.Rule 8D Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 (Hereinafter The ‘Rules’). For This, Revenue Has Raised Four Grounds Which Are Exhaustive & Argumentative & Hence, We Will Not Reproduce The Same.

For Appellant: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCITFor Respondent: Shri R. Sudharshan, A.C.A
Section 143(3)Section 14A

DCIT, CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2050/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Limited, Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2049/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

DCIT, CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2048/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

DCIT, CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2047/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

DCIT, CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2046/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

Mr. Manu Mahmud Parpia, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 14(1) (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1514/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri, Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1514/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Mr. Manu Mahmud Parpia बिधम/ Ito-14(1)(2) 72, Tenerife Little Gibbs Room No. 457, Aayakar Vs. Road No.2, Malabar Hill, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400006. Mumbai-400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacpp8377R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. Gopal Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee (Individual) Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/ Nfac, Delhi Dated 19.04.2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Are As Under: - 1) “The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Conforming The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Disallowing Rs. 5,12,121/- Out Of Expenses U/S 14A. Your Appellant Submits That No Expenditure Has Been Incurred For The Purpose Of Earning Exempt Income & The Entire Disallowance Of Rs. 5,12,121/- Ought To Be Deleted. Without Prejudice To The Above, Your Appellant Submits That The Disallowance Is Excessive & Ought To Be Reduced Substantially.

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 10(33)Section 14ASection 234B