Section 8D of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 8D is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,114 of the 499 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 8D

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,114
citing judgments

When an assessee has sufficient interest-free funds available, and investments are made from mixed funds, it is presumed that the investments are made from the interest-free funds, thus precluding the disallowance of interest expenditure.

Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT
378 ITR 33 · 2015 · High Court
1,562
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.

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT
402 ITR 640 · 2018 · Supreme Court
1,562
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.

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.

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
165 ITD 27 · 2017 · ITAT
882
citing judgments

No disallowance under section 14A can be made while computing book profits under section 115JB unless the expenditure is debited to the profit and loss account and satisfies clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2).

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
82 Taxmann.com 415 · 2017 · High Court
789
citing judgments

Disallowance computed under Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, cannot be added to book profits under Section 115JB for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes. Additionally, for Section 14A disallowance, only investments that yielded exempt income during the year are considered for calculating their average value.

Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
372 ITR 694 · 2015 · High Court
711
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot exceed the actual amount of exempt income earned by the assessee. This principle also applies when computing book profits under section 115JB.

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT
394 ITR 449 · 2017 · Supreme Court
679
citing judgments

Expenditure can only be disallowed under Section 14A if the income is exempt and not part of the total income. The Assessing Officer must first record dissatisfaction with the assessee's accounts or computation before proceeding to make a disallowance under Section 14A or applying Rule 8D.

Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT
255 ITR 273 · 2002 · Supreme Court
650
citing judgments

For the purpose of computing book profits under Section 115J, arrears of depreciation, including those arising from assets working extra shifts, are a necessary charge on profits if debited to the profit and loss account and are allowable as such.

CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd.
223 Taxmann 130 · 2014 · High Court
541
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D is not warranted if the assessee has not earned any exempt income in the relevant assessment year.

Judgments on Section 8D

THE BOMBAY DYEING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 5274/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Jm\Nand\Nms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Am\N\Nita No.5274/Mum/2025\N(Assessment Year: 2018-19)\Nm/S. The Bombay Dyeing And\Nmanufacturing Company Limited,\Nneville House, Jn Heredia Marg,\Nballard Estate,\Nmumbai - 400 001\Npan: Aaact2328K\Nvs.\Nnational Faceless Appeal Centre,\Ndelhi (Deputy Commissioner Of\Nincome Tax, Central Circle-2(1)(1),\Nmumbai - 400001\N(Appellant)\N(Respondent)\Nassessee By\N:\Nshri Yogesh Thar, A.R.\Nms. Sukanya Jairam, A.R &\Nshri Saurabh Surana, A.R.\Nrespondent By\N:\Nshri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Ar\Ndate Of Hearing\N:\N22.12.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement\N:\N18.03.2025\Norder\Nper Kavitha Rajagopal, J M:\Nthis Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned\Ncommissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘Ld. Cit(A)' For Short], National Faceless\Nappeal Centre (‘Nfac' For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'),\Npertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.' For Short) 2018-19.\N2.\Nthe Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:\N“1. Ground No. 1: Disallowance Of Rs. 4,65,28,171/- Under Section 14A Of The\Nact:\N1.

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 250Section 43C

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. USHODAYA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1782/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1781 & 1782/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Ushodaya Enterprises Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaacu2690P (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) करदाताकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्वकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Department Represented By सुनवाईसमाप्तहोनेकीतिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/ Date Of Pronouncement : Shri H. Srinivasulu, Advocate : Shri Mathivanan S A, Sr. Ar : 04/03/2026 : 13/03/2026 Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Feeling Aggrieved By The Different Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 01/08/2025 & Dated 07/08/2025 For The Assessment Year (“A.Y.”) 2017-18 & A.Υ. 2018-19 Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Are Related To The Same Assessee, They Are Heard Together & One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Brevity.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. USHODAYA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1781/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1781 & 1782/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ushodaya Enterprises Private Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaacu2690P (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) करदाताकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्वकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Department Represented By सुनवाईसमाप्तहोनेकीतिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/ Date Of Pronouncement : Shri H. Srinivasulu, Advocate : Shri Mathivanan S A, Sr. Ar : 04/03/2026 : 13/03/2026 Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Feeling Aggrieved By The Different Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 01/08/2025 & Dated 07/08/2025 For The Assessment Year (“A.Y.”) 2017-18 & A.Υ. 2018- 19 Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Are Related To The Same Assessee, They Are Heard Together & One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Brevity.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

Showing 120 of 499 · Page 1 of 25

...