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

Welspun Fintrade Ltd. (Welspun Fintrade Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT - 8(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 6172/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Ravish Soodआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita No.6172/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S.Welspun Fintrade Limited, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Now Welspun Fintrade Pvt. Ltd), 8(3)(2), Room No.615, Trade World, B-Wing, 9Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Vs. Kamala Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Mumbai – 400 020. Marg, Lower Parel,Mumbai-400 013. Pan: Aaacw2877J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Deshpande-Dr Assessee By : Shri Mitesh N. Shah सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 03/01/2018 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम, 1961 क" धारा ( 1 ) 254 केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर क" धारा आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य,राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार -Per Rajendra,Am: लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dtd. 19/08/2016 Of The Cit(A)-14A,Mumbai The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Trading & Investment Filed Its Return Of Income On,13/09/2012,Declaring Loss Of Rs.5.72 Crores.The Assessing Officer(Ao) Completed The Assessment On,13/03/2015,U/S.143(3)Of The Act,Determining Its Income At Rs.(-) 5, 40,77,445/-

For Appellant: Shri Mitesh N. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande-DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

DCIT Cir. 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Capital Ltd., Navi Mumbai

ITA 2341/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./2341/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit-Circle-3(3)(1) M/S. Reliance Capital Ltd. Room No.609, 6Th Floor H-Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Knowledge City, Mumbai-400 020. Koperkhairane, Navi Mumbai-400 710. Pan:Aaacr 5054 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Abhijit Patankar- Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Jitendra B. Sanghvi-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/12/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 03/01/2018 लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 25/01/2016Of Cit(A)-8, Mumbai The Assessing Officer (Ao) Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Leasing,Investment In Shares/Stocks,Merchant & Investment Banking,Iled Its Return Of Income On 30/09/2011 Declaring Loss Of Rs.173.73 Crores Under Normal Provisions & Book Loss Of Rs.212.75 Crores.Later On,A Revised Return Was Filed,Declaring Loss Of Rs.159.60 Crores & Book Loss Of Rs.79.97 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra B. Sanghvi-ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar- DR
Section 115JSection 14A

Shanti Sarup Reniwal, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 38, Mumbai

ITA 2554/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Ravish Soodआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./2554/Mum/2015, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Shantiswaroop Reniwal Acit, Central Circle-38 156, Maker Chambers-Vi Aayakar Bhavan 220, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021. Pan:Admpr 3332 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Sh.Saurabh Deshpande-Dr Assessee By: Shri Reepal G. Tralshawala-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 03/01/2018 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act). लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Orders,Dated 20/01/2015,Of The Cit (A)-54,Mumbai,The Assessee Is Filed The Present Appeal,Assessees,An Individuals,Filed His Return Of Income On Declaring Income Of Rs. The Assessing Officer(Ao)Completed The Assessment On U/S.143(3)Of The Act,Determining His Income At Rs. .

For Appellant: Shri Reepal G. Tralshawala-ARFor Respondent: Sh.Saurabh Deshpande-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

Asst CIT (OSD) 8(3), Mumbai vs. Time Technoplast Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed and assessee appeal is hereby ordered to be allowed

ITA 7008/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 7045/Mum/2014 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Time Technoplast Ltd. बिधम/ Acit, Range-8(3) 102, Todi Complex, 35 Saki Vs. Mumbai Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400072 आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7008/Mum/2014 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit, Range-8(3) बिधम/ M/S. Time Technoplast Ltd. 102, Todi Complex, 35 Saki Vs. Mumbai Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400072 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaact2783J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri V. Justin (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Rakesh Joshi सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05.10.2017 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02. 01.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 24.09.2014 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010-11. Ita. Nos 7045/M/2014 7008/M/2014 A.Y. 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80