Dr. S. Reddappa v. Union of India

232 ITR 62Reported decision#17295 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40(a)(i)Section 43B(f)Section 68Section 69CSection 1962

Issues it is cited on

section 5(2)(b)section 10(2)(xv)section 43b(f)section 145(1)section 46section 9(1)(i)section 5(2)income tax settlement commissionbusiness connectionsection 48section 40(a)(i)section 194c

Judgments citing Dr. S. Reddappa v. Union of India

DCIT, Central Circle 2, Rajkot vs. Aditya Birla Global Trading (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Swiss Singapore India Pvt. Ltd., Gandhidham

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

ITA 353/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

…se in nature of charge or interest or penalty, it is necessary to evaluate whether the said levy is compensatory in character or not and for this, it relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Dr. S. Reddappa Vs. Union of India (232 ITR 62). Moreover, these are the charges paid by the assessee under the Customs Act, 1962 for late filing bill of entry, therefore, late fee, should not be treated as a penalty, hence, order passed by the Id. CIT (A) may be upheld. 14. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We find that Customs Act, 1962 has…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Rajkot vs. Aditya Birla Global Trading(India) Pvt.Ltd. (Swiss Singapore India Pvt. Ltd.), Gandhidham

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

ITA 284/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

…se in nature of charge or interest or penalty, it is necessary to evaluate whether the said levy is compensatory in character or not and for this, it relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Dr. S. Reddappa Vs. Union of India (232 ITR 62). Moreover, these are the charges paid by the assessee under the Customs Act, 1962 for late filing bill of entry, therefore, late fee, should not be treated as a penalty, hence, order passed by the Id. CIT (A) may be upheld. 14. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We find that Customs Act, 1962 has…

Aditya Birla Global Trading (India) Private Limited, Gujarat vs. DCIT-ACIT Cent-2 RKT, Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

ITA 226/RJT/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

…se in nature of charge or interest or penalty, it is necessary to evaluate whether the said levy is compensatory in character or not and for this, it relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Dr. S. Reddappa Vs. Union of India (232 ITR 62). Moreover, these are the charges paid by the assessee under the Customs Act, 1962 for late filing bill of entry, therefore, late fee, should not be treated as a penalty, hence, order passed by the Id. CIT (A) may be upheld. 14. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We find that Customs Act, 1962 has…

Aditya Birla Global Trading (India) Private Limited, Gujarat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Gandhihdam, Gandhidham, Gujarat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

ITA 225/RJT/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

…se in nature of charge or interest or penalty, it is necessary to evaluate whether the said levy is compensatory in character or not and for this, it relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Dr. S. Reddappa Vs. Union of India (232 ITR 62). Moreover, these are the charges paid by the assessee under the Customs Act, 1962 for late filing bill of entry, therefore, late fee, should not be treated as a penalty, hence, order passed by the Id. CIT (A) may be upheld. 14. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We find that Customs Act, 1962 has…

Bosch Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner

In the result, petition is allowed

WP/27405/2015HC Karnataka15 Oct 2015

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ram Mohan Reddy

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234C

…e observations of the five Judges Bench in Commissioner for Income Tax vs. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala, that Section 234 A, B and C are mandatory in nature; (ii) the observation of this court in Dr.S.Reddappa and another vs. Union of India and others reported in 232 ITR 62 that the nature of interest charged under the aforesaid 9 provisions is compensatory and not penal and that Section 234C regulates payment of simple interest at the rate of 18% per annum in case an assessee liable to pay advance tax under Section 208 of the Act, either fails to pay the tax or pays the same which is less than 30%…