CIT v. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady

379 ITR 529High Court2015#10575 most cited

What is CIT v. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady authority for?

Where the High Court admits an appeal on a substantial question of law, the addition itself becomes debatable, and consequently, penalty under section 271(1)(c) may not be leviable.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady · 379 ITR 529 · section 271(1)(c) · penalty · substantial question of law · debatable addition · High Court admission · furnishing inaccurate particulars

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 148Section 28(v)Section 14ASection 147Section 260A

Issues it is cited on

section 28(v)dependent agent peagency pefixed place peroyalty incomesection 260section 260apermanent establishmentmiscellaneous applicationfurnishing inaccurate particularspenalty u/s 271(1)(c)change of opinion

Judgments citing CIT v. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation, Circle-2(1) Bengaluru, Bengaluru vs. Palmer Investment Group Limited, Virgin Islands

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

ITA 2431/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Respondent: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 274Section 275

…the present appeal has been filed by the revenue before this Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR furnished the order sheets of the Hon’ble High Court and also the Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court reported in (2015) 379 ITR 529 (Karnataka) in the case of CIT vs. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady and also another Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court reported in (2015) 379 ITR 50 in the case of CIT Vs. Ankita Electronics (P.) Ltd. and submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the order of the Ld.CIT(A) has to be confirmed. 6. The Ld.DR submitted t…

M/S.Redington Distributions Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intltaxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 894/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…d Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA No. 2/Mds/2016) (Chennai ITAT) 13. The Ld. Sr Counsel further submitted that, it was not a case that the assessee had furnished any inaccurate particulars of income. R…

M/S.Redington Distributions Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intltaxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 893/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…d Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA No. 2/Mds/2016) (Chennai ITAT) 13. The Ld. Sr Counsel further submitted that, it was not a case that the assessee had furnished any inaccurate particulars of income. R…

M/S. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 892/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…d Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA No. 2/Mds/2016) (Chennai ITAT) 13. The Ld. Sr Counsel further submitted that, it was not a case that the assessee had furnished any inaccurate particulars of income. R…

M/S. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 891/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…d Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA No. 2/Mds/2016) (Chennai ITAT) 13. The Ld. Sr Counsel further submitted that, it was not a case that the assessee had furnished any inaccurate particulars of income. R…

M/S.Redington Distributors Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 890/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…d Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA No. 2/Mds/2016) (Chennai ITAT) 13. The Ld. Sr Counsel further submitted that, it was not a case that the assessee had furnished any inaccurate particulars of income. R…

M/S.Redington Distribution Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. ACIT, Intl Taxation Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 889/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 144CSection 148Section 271(1)(c)

…d Investment & Trading Co. (ITA No. 240 of 2009) (Del HC) − Nayan Builders & Developer [2014]368 ITR 722 (Bom HC) − Harsh International (P.) Ltd.,[2021] 431 ITR 118(Delhi HC) − Thomson Press India Ltd.,2014 (3) TMI 1174,(Delhi HC); − Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) (Kar HC) − Perot Systems TSI (India) (P.) Ltd. [(2018) 94 taxmann.com 625] (Delhi ITAT) − TTK Healthcare Limited (ITA No. 2028/Mds/2011) (Chennai ITAT) − Smt. Hemalatha Rajan (ITA No. 2/Mds/2016) (Chennai ITAT) 13. The Ld. Sr Counsel further submitted that, it was not a case that the assessee had furnished any inaccurate particulars of income. R…

Manjulata Sahoo, Keonjhar vs. Principal CIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 96/CTK/2021[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack21 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Smt. Manjulata Manjulata Sahoo, Sahoo, Vs. Pr. Cit, Sambalpur Pr. Cit, Sambalpur At: Banulal Colony, New At: Banulal Colony, New Market, Market, Keo Keonjhargarh, Keonjhar Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Beips 1809 G (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.R.Panda, Ar B.R.Panda, Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 21/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/02 2/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B.R.Panda, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

…ecome debatable and P a g e 2 | 4 Assessment Year : 2014-15 consequently, the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) cannot be levied. For this proposition, ld AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Karanataka High Court in the case of CIT vs Dr. Harsha N Billiangady, 379 ITR 529 (Kar), wherein, it has been held that where the penalty was imposed in respect of any addition where the High Court has admitted the appeal on substantial question of law, then the sustainability of the addition itself becomes debatable. In these circumstances, penalty cannot be levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. Ld AR also placed reliance on the d…

Sh. Himanshu Jain, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 1082/CHANDI/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Oct 2019AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Vej Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153A(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

…s been admitted, the addition itself becomes debatable and the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is not leviable. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady [2015) reported in 379 ITR 529 (Karnataka). 8. In his rival submissions the Ld. Sr. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. 9. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. On a similar issue the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (supra) held as under: “…

Sh. Himanshu Jain, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 1081/CHANDI/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Oct 2019AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Vej Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153A(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

…s been admitted, the addition itself becomes debatable and the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is not leviable. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady [2015) reported in 379 ITR 529 (Karnataka). 8. In his rival submissions the Ld. Sr. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. 9. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. On a similar issue the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (supra) held as under: “…

CIT v. Dr. Harsha N. Biliangady (379 ITR 529) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax