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 2,118 of the 401 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
2,118
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.

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.

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).

Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
372 ITR 694 · 2015 · High Court
803
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.

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.

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT
394 ITR 449 · 2017 · Supreme Court
683
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
657
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
579
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

M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), Chennai

Appeal stand allowed to the extent of correct adoption of cost of investments

ITA 1215/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1211/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Acit M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd. बनाम/ Corporate Circle-3(1), 21, Patullos Road, Mount Road, Vs. Chennai. Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3116-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1215/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd. Acit बनाम/ 21, Patullos Road, Mount Road, Corporate Circle-3(1), Vs. Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3116-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. Ar (Virtual) " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. AR (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

ACIT, Nungambakkam, Chennai vs. Sundaram Finance Holdings Limited, Chennai

Appeal stand allowed to the extent of correct adoption of cost of investments

ITA 1211/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1211/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Acit M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd. बनाम/ Corporate Circle-3(1), 21, Patullos Road, Mount Road, Vs. Chennai. Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3116-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1215/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S. Sundaram Finance Holdings Ltd. Acit बनाम/ 21, Patullos Road, Mount Road, Corporate Circle-3(1), Vs. Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3116-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. Ar (Virtual) " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. AR (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Rockwell Tradevin Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 13(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1501/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Sept 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1501/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rockwell Tradevin Pvt. Ltd...…….…....…………….......…....………....Appellant 187, Rabindra Sarini, 2Nd Floor, Room No.73, Kolkata – 700007. [Pan: Aafcr1641C] Vs. Ito, Ward-13(3), Kolkata.......................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. S. Gupta, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 24, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 24, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.06.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeals: “Ground 1: That The Ld. Ao Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Passing The Order Appealed Against In As Much As In View Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case No Such Order Was At All Liable To Be Passed & The Lad. Cita) Erred In Confirming The Same. Ground 2: That The Ld. Ao Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Making An Addition Of Rs.1,99,00,000/- U/S. 68 In Respect Of Share Capital Raised During The Year By Issuing 39,800 Equity Shares @ Of Rs.500/, Including Share Premium Of Rs.490/- Per Share, In As Much As In View Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case No Such Addition Was At All Called For & The Ld. Cita) Erred In Confirming The Same.

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68