Disallowance under Section 14A of Income TAx Act, 1961
Income Tax : The issue was whether exempt dividend income could be taxed by overriding Rule 8D. The ITAT held that additions beyond the Section...
Income Tax : The Tribunal clarified that disallowance under Section 14A is not warranted when sufficient interest-free own funds are available,...
Income Tax : The ruling confirms that notional disallowances under Section 14A cannot be added while computing book profits under the MAT regim...
Income Tax : Section 14A disallows expenses related to tax-exempt income. Rule 8D provides the formula, ensuring only taxable-income-related ex...
Income Tax : Tribunal confirms that detailed AO dissatisfaction justifies invoking Rule 8D, ensuring proper disallowance of expenses related to...
Income Tax : Bombay Chartered Accountants' Society has made a Representation on 'Suggestions for Amendments in the Income Tax Act', on 24th May...
Income Tax : The mechanical disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D is also being added to the book profit by the AO irrespective of the fact whethe...
Income Tax : 1. IMPLEMENTATION OF IND-AS AND THEIR IMPACT ON TAXABLE INCOME IND-AS (Indian version of IFRS) accounting standards are being impl...
Income Tax : Amendments to Section 14A to provide that (i) dividend received after suffering dividend-distribution tax and share income from fi...
Income Tax : As earlier intimated to you, Writ Petition bearing No. 50 of 2010 (Indian Exporters Grievances Forum & Other vs. CIT) challenging ...
Income Tax : Court held that penalty under Section 270A cannot apply where assessed income does not exceed processed income. Key takeaway: stat...
Income Tax : The case examined whether interest earned from co-operative banks qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d). The Tribunal he...
Income Tax : Consistency over technicalities: ITAT Mumbai allowed actuarial pension provision as an ascertained liability, rejected mechanical ...
Income Tax : A taxpayer could submit a revised return u/s 139(5) only when it discovered a bona fide omission or incorrect statement in the ori...
Income Tax : The Tribunal set aside additions to book profit after ruling that MAT provisions do not apply to banks established under a special...
Income Tax : 2) The expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total income shall be the aggregate of following amounts,...
Income Tax : Circular No. 5/2014-Income Tax Central Board of Direct Taxes, in exercise of its powers under section 119 of the Act hereby clari...
Income Tax : INCOME TAX NOTIFICATION NO-45/2008, DT: March 24, 2008 Method for determining amount of expenditure in relation to income not incl...
Income Tax : The provisions of Sections 144-A and 144-B of the Income-tax Act have come into force with effect from 1st January 1976. Instructi...
Depreciation is admittedly in the nature of allowance and, therefore, it cannot be subject matter of disallowance under section 14A, which must remain confined to expenditure incurred by the assessee. Similarly, as far as deduction under section 80D is concerned, it cannot be subject matter of disallowance under section 14A either. The deduction under section 80D is not admissible because it is an expenditure for the purpose of earning an income but because, by virtue of specific provision under section 80D, payment of premium of health insurance, which is inherently personal expenses of the assessee, is admissible as deduction. This deduction cannot, therefore, be subject matter of disallowance under section 14A, which, as we have noted earlier, is confined to expenditure incurred for the purpose of an income which is not includible in total income of the assessee.
In the case of a trader where shares are held as stock-in-trade no part of interest on borrowed funds can be disallowed u/s 14A as incurred in relation to Dividend income. The interest on borrowed funds used for trading activity is an allowable expenditure under section 36(1)(iii) and the same cannot be treated as the expenditure for earning the dividend income which is incidental to the trading activity.
Section 14A, the heading of which is ‘Expenditure incurred in relation to income not includable in total income’, was inserted in the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), by the Finance Act, 2001. As per Circular No.14 of 2001 [252 ITR (St.) 65], issued by the CBDT, a new section 14A was inserted, so as to clarify the intention of the Legislature since the inception of the Act, that no deduction shall be made in respect of any expenditure incurred by the assessee
The proviso to Section 14A only bars reassessment/rectification and not original assessment on the basis of the retrospective amendment. The proviso does not stipulate and state that Section 14A of the Act cannot be relied upon during the course of the original assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer was, therefore, required to disallow expenses incurred for earning exempt or tax free income.
So far as the disallowance of administrative expenditure is concerned, we feel considering the fact that there is no precise formula for proportionate disallowance, no disallowance is called for, for proportionate administrative cost attributable to earning of tax free income until Rule 8D came into force. We, therefore, dispose of the appeals by setting aside the orders of the Tribunal and that of the first appellate authority on this issue and remand all the assessments back to the Assessing Officer for reworking disallowance under Section 14A in the case of each assessee for each assessment year. The proportionate disallowance under Section 14A should be limited to only interest liability and not overheads or administrative expenditure; which should be considered for disallowance under Rule 8D from 2007-2008 onwards.
As the funds were mixed, it is not possible to ascertain whether the investment in tax free bonds is out of the assessee’s own funds. The source of investment in the tax free bonds was not identified. The AO did not establish any nexus between the borrowed funds and the investments in the tax free bonds. The cash flow of the assessee was not seen. Therefore, the apportionment on a pro rata basis was improper in the absence of anything brought by the AO to rebut the assessee’s stand that the investment in the tax free bonds had been made out of the funds of own funds (Minda Investments, Hero Cycles 323 ITR 518 (P&H) and Winsome Textile Industries 319 ITR 204 (P&H) followed);
The assessee is maintaining separate books of account for the purpose of business. The tax-free investments are in his personal capacity. As the AO has not disallowed any expenditure of personal nature out of the business income, the expenditure claimed in the business of share dealings cannot be correlated to the incomes earned in personal capacity that too on dividend, PPF interest and tax free interest on RBI bonds. Accordingly, the estimation of expenditure of Rs. 20,000 out of business expenditure as being incurred for earning tax free income is not acceptable.
The plea of the assessee based on Minda Investments Ltd that the disallowance should be deleted cannot be accepted as in the later decisions similar matters have been restored to the file of the AO and according to rule of precedence, later decision passed by similar strength of the Bench has to be followed in preference to the earlier decision.
The AO can not apply Rule 8D without pointing out any inaccuracy in the method of apportionment or allocation of expenses as adopted by the assessee. Rule 8D r.w.s. 14A(2) can be invoked only if the AO “having regard to the accounts of the assessee, is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of expenditure incurred” in relation to tax-free income.
This Article summarizes recent decisions Bombay and Kerala High Courts on the issue of disallowance of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income by way of dividend on shares.
