VIMAL KUMAR JAIN,RANGBARI vs. ITO, KOTA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR (PHYSICAL HEARING) BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No: 230/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12

Vimal Kumar Jain ITO, S/o Shri Bhanwar Lal Jain, Ward 1(2), Vs Bapawar, Kota Kota PAN: AAWPJ9897N (Respondent) (Appellant)

Assessee Represented: None Revenue Represented: Ms. Aarti Rawat, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 17-08-2026 Date of pronouncement : 25-08-2026 ORDER PER : KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

The Appellant by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] dated 07.08.2024, confirming the penalty levied by Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on the ground that:- “Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) be levied only when there concealment of income or furnish inaccurate particulars of income. In above case penalty should not be levied as there was survey conducted on assessee during the

I.T.A No. 230/JPR/2025 Page No 2 Vimal Kumar Jain

year undisclosed stock for Rs. 1,30,39,090/-, penalty on estimated addition on basis of undisclosed stock should not be levied and be deleted. Briefly stated, facts necessary for adjudication of the issues 2. at hand are: On the basis of assessment completed u/s 144/147 of the Act vide which total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 1,30,39,090/-, being undisclosed/surrendered income, penalty proceedings were intitiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. On failure on the assessee to contest the penalty proceeding. AO proceeded to levy the penalty of Rs. 38,78,700/- @ 100%, which has been confirmed by ld. CIT(A). 3. Assessee carried the matter for ld. CIT(A) filed appeal by way of filing appeal who has dismissed the same by confirming the penalty. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing present appeal. 4. Appellant has filed this appeal on 28.12.2025. When taken for argument, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Perusal of the file shows that this appeal was filed by the assessee way back on 18.02.2025, thereafter numerous notices were sent to the appellant but he has failed to appear in person or through his representatives. Now, Bench has decided to dispose of this appeal on the basis of

I.T.A No. 230/JPR/2025 Page No 3 Vimal Kumar Jain

material available on record, with the assistance of the ld. DR for the revenue. 5. At the very outset, it is perused that this appeal filed by the assessee against the penalty order passed by AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act confirmed by ld. CIT(A), is delayed by 110 days, however, no application for condonation of delay has been filed nor any one has come up before the Bench to make any oral submissions on condonation of delay. 6. Since, the present appeal is delayed by 110 days, application of condonation of delay has not been filed along with appeal sets or subsequently, this Bench has no option except to dismiss this appeal in limine, having not been filed within the period of limitation. 7. Resultantly, present appeal is dismissed in limine, being not filed within the period of limitation. Order pronounced in the open court on 25-08-2026 Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaipur Dated:- 25/08/2026. *Ganesh Kumar, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant-

I.T.A No. 230/JPR/2025 Page No 4 Vimal Kumar Jain

Asst. Registrar