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

Exim Scrips Dealers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 5(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 11/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Kz] I.T.A. No. 11/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Exim Scrips Dealers Pvt. Ltd..................................…………………………..........................Appellant 412, Mukti Chambers, 4Th Floor, 4, Clive Row, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Aaace 6906 E] Ito, Ward – 5(3) Kolkata...................…………………………………………………............Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Appearances By: Shri Girish Sharma, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 07, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2019 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 2, Kolkata Dated 03.12.2018 & The Solitary Issue Involved Therein Relates To The Disallowance Of Rs. 3,54,638/- Made By The Ao & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) U/S 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Read With Rule 8D Of Income Tax Rules 1962. 2. The Assessee In The Present Case Is A Non-Banking Financial Company Which Is Engaged In The Business Of Investment In Loans & Advances. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Was Filed By It On 28.09.2015 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs. 28,30,083/-. In The Said Return, Dividend Income Of Rs. 34,28,861/- Received During The Year Under Consideration Was Claimed To Be Exempt By The Assessee. In The Computation Of Total Income, Disallowance Of Rs. 3,53,488/- Was Made By The Assessee On Account Of Expenses Incurred In Relation To The Said Exempt Income As Required By Section 14A. In The Assessment Completed U/S 143(3) Vide An Order Dated

Section 143(3)Section 14A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Dcb Bank Limited (Formerly Development Credit Bank Limited), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2013-2014

ITA 62/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Acit 2(3)(1), M/S Dcb Bank Ltd. (Formerly R. No. 552, 5Th Floor, Development Credit Bank Ltd.), Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 6Th Floor, Tower A, Peninsula Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Business Park, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aaacd1461F (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri D.G. Pansari (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Satish Mody (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 13/02/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/05/2019 O R D E R Per Ram Lal Negi, Jm This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 20.10.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6 (For Short ‘The Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2013-14, Whereby The Ld. Cit(A) Has Allowed The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143 (3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Bank Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration Declaring The Total Income Of Rs. 49,33,50,936/-. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act Determining The Total Income At Nil After Allowing Set Off Of Loss Of Earlier Years. The Ao Disallowed The Deduction Of Rs. 9,48,81,164/- Claimed By The Assessee, Treating The Broken Period Interest As Part Of The Cost Price Of The Securities Acquired By The Assessee Bank, Disallowed The Amortization Of Securities Premium Of Htm Securities Claimed By The Assessee Amounting To Rs. 4,73,09,872/- Treating The Same As Part Of The Cost Price. The Ao Further Made Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Satish Mody (AR)For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari (DR)
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14A