Parna Industries Ltd.,, Ahmedabad vs Department Of Income Tax
As regards levy of penalty on estimated additions, the
assessee relied on the judgments in the case of CIT vs Subhash Trading Co 221
ITR 110 (Guj); CIT vs Mussadilal Ram Bharose (1987) 165 ITR 14 (SC);
Paramount Radio Services vs ITD (1990) 36 TTJ 464 (Ahd); Jumabhai
Premchand (HUF) vs CIT (2000) 243 ITR 812 (Guj); CIT vs Suresh Kumar
Bansal (2002) 254 ITR 130 (P&H); ITO vs Kwality Spinners (2003) SOT 323
(Chd); Harigopal Singh vs CIT (2002) 258 ITR 85 (P&H); Haryana Delhi Tpt.
Commission Agency vs ACIT (2001) 79 ITD 145 (Agra); CIT vs Prem Das
(No.1)(2001) 248 ITR 234 (P&H); CIT vs Ra vail Singh & Co (2002) 122 Taxman
831 (P&H); Hari Om Kumar Umesh Chand vs ITO (2002) 124 Taxman 213
(Agra)(Mag); Dr Ravi Paul vs ACIT (2002) 74 TTJ 146 (Asr); CIT vs MM Rice
Mills (2002) 123 Taxman 308 (P&H); ITO vs Smt. Puirnima Devi Gupta (2004) 3
SOT 753 (Jodh); Bipra Investments & rusts (P) Ltd vs ACIT (2004) 3 SOT 897
(Ahd); Samaj Ram Soni vs ACIT (2004) 84 TTJ 27 (Jodh); CIT vs Aarkay Saree
Museum 187 ITR 147 (Bom); Balamakrishna Engg Construction Corporation vs
DCIT 56 ITD 411 (Hyd).