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, CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Jks Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue, is dismissed

ITA 986/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.986/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Cc-1(3), Kolkata Vs. M/S Jks Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. P-4, Black Burn Lane, Kolkata – Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 700 012. 110-Shantipally, Kolkata– 700 107. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj 3408 M (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri Soumyajit Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Respondent By:Shri Chirag Desai, A/R. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28/11/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Kolkata, In Appeal No.296/Cit(A)-1/W-1(2)/2013- 14, Dated 04.02.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.143(3) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 31.01.2013. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows: “1. In The Facts & Circumstances & Law Point Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Is Erred In Deleting The Addition U/S 14A Without Going Into The Provision Of It Act & It Rule. 2. The Assessee Craves Leave To Make Any Addition, Alteration, Modification Etc. Of Ground Or Grounds Before Or In Course Of Appellate Proceedings.” 3.The Brief Facts Giving Rise To This Appeal Are That During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessee Furnished A Formal Computation Of Total Income. The Assessee Claimed The Dividend Income As An Exempted One U/S 10 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. On Examination Of Audited Accounts, It Was Seen That During The Relevant Previous Year The Assessee Earned Dividend

For Appellant: Shri Soumyajit Dasgupta, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Chirag Desai, A/R
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14A

Joonktollee Tea & Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-4, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 771/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 771/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Joonktollee Tea & Industries Ltd...............................…………………………...Appellant 21, Strand Road, Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan: Aaacj 6577 G] D.C.I.T., Cir – 4, Kolkata...................……………………………………………...Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 8Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Appearances By: Shri B.K. Chaturvedi, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P.K. Mondal, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 21, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 31, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, A.M. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(Appeals) – 6, Kolkata Dated 22.02.2016. 2. The Issue Involved In Ground No 1 Relates To The Disallowance Made By The A.O. Under Section 14A Read With Rule 8D Which Is Sustained By The Ld. Cit(A) To The Extent Of Rs. 22,91,567/-. 3. The Assessee In The Present Case Is A Company Which Is Engaged In The Business Of Cultivation & Manufacture Of Tea At Its Estates Situated In The Stataes Of Assam & Karnataka. It Also Owns Coffee Estate In The State Of Karnataka & Tamil Nadu. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Was Filed By It On 20.09.2011 Declaring A Loss Of Rs. 38,69,233/- & Book Profit Of Rs. 74,11,410/-

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I