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-4(1), Indore vs. Texmo Pipes and Products Limited, Burhanpur

In the result, ground No.3 in IT(SS)A No

ITA 423/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Sept 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकरअपीलसं./It(Ss)A Nos.2, 1, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13/Ind/2025 [ "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2016-17 ] Texmo Pipes & Products Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 98, Bahadarpur Road, Vs. Income Tax, Central-1, Burhanpur, Aaykar Bhawan, Opp. White Madhya Pradesh-450331. Church, Indore, Madhya Pradesh-452001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacct9780D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 423/Ind/2025 [ "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 ] Deputy Commissioner Of Texmo Pipes & Products Income Tax-4(1), Vs. Limited, Aaykar Bhawan, Opp. White 98, Bahadarpur Road, Burhanpur, Church, Indore, Madhya Madhya Pradesh-450331. Pradesh – 452001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacct9780D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Anil Kamal Garg With Shri Aayush Garg, Ca Respondent By : Shri Anup Singh, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/06/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/09/2026 :Order: Per, Bench: Captioned Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee & One Cross-Appeal Filed By The Revenue Pertaining To Assessment Years, 2010–11 To 2016–17, Are Directed

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kamal Garg with Shri Aayush Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, CIT. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 250

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the ground No

ITA 870/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal(Physicalhearing) Small Industries Development Bank Dcit, Central Circle – 3(3)(2), Of India, Swavalamban Bhawan, Vs Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan, C-11, G Block, Bandra Kurla M.K. Marg, New Marine Lines, Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400051. [Pan: Aabcs3480N] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Dcit, Central Circle – 3(3)(1), Small Industries Development Bank Of Mumbai Vs India, Swavalamban Bhawan, C-11, 522, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400020. East, Mumbai – 400051. [Pan: Aabcs3480N] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Rakesh Joshi, Ar Revenue By Shri Sajit V Nair, Sr. Dr Date Of Institution 26.12.2025 Date Of Hearing 17.06.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 07.09.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfacdated 13.11.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Assessing Officer In Disallowing Claim Of Rs.60,79,783/-, Being Proportionate Amortised Amount Of Lease Premium Paid To Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority In Respect Of Leasehold Land & The Reasons Assigned For Doing So Are Wrong & Contrary To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Provisions Of Income Tax Act, 1961 & Rules Made Thereunder.

Section 115JSection 158ASection 254(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)

Small Industries Development Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(3)2, Mumbai

In the result, the ground No

ITA 9170/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal(Physicalhearing) Small Industries Development Bank Dcit, Central Circle – 3(3)(2), Of India, Swavalamban Bhawan, Vs Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan, C-11, G Block, Bandra Kurla M.K. Marg, New Marine Lines, Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400051. [Pan: Aabcs3480N] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Dcit, Central Circle – 3(3)(1), Small Industries Development Bank Of Mumbai Vs India, Swavalamban Bhawan, C-11, 522, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400020. East, Mumbai – 400051. [Pan: Aabcs3480N] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Rakesh Joshi, Ar Revenue By Shri Sajit V Nair, Sr. Dr Date Of Institution 26.12.2025 Date Of Hearing 17.06.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 07.09.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfacdated 13.11.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Assessing Officer In Disallowing Claim Of Rs.60,79,783/-, Being Proportionate Amortised Amount Of Lease Premium Paid To Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority In Respect Of Leasehold Land & The Reasons Assigned For Doing So Are Wrong & Contrary To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Provisions Of Income Tax Act, 1961 & Rules Made Thereunder.

Section 115JSection 158ASection 254(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)