VIMAL KUMAR JAIN,NEAR KHADE GANESHJI MANDIR vs. ITO WARD1(2), KOTA, ITO WARD KOTA

ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A), Jaipur -4 dated 25-02-2025 for the assessment year 2011-12 and thus raising therein following grounds of appeal. ‘’A survey was conducted on assessee making an addition of Rs.1,30,39,090/- by invoking undisclosed stock found but assessee try to make explanation of stock was purchased from farmer, mandi tax paid, purchase receipt issued by mandi samiti, but department not considered and made the addition. On 22-10-2011 assessee was arrested by Police due to complain raised by some farmer for non-payment and then assessee was VIMAL KUMAR JAIN VS ITO, WARD 1(2), KOTA released on 4-09-2013 by High Court order. Assessee was mentally disturbed and arise certain medical problems. There is no employment in family, no earning member in family, whole family was disturbed from above incidence. Assessee was not aware about any income tax notice and unable to file appeal before CIT(A) on time. There was no one to help them for income tax proceedings. So there is no reasonable cause and out of control of assessee to file appeal before ld. CIT(A).’’ 2.1 The Bench during the course of hearing observed that none appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called out for hearing nor any written submission was filed by the assessee to counter the orders of the lower authorities. Hence, the Bench decided to dispose of the appeal of the assessee ex-parte based on the materials available on record 2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. 2.3 The Bench heard the ld. DR and after going through the file in the case of the assessee, it is noticed that the assessee was ex-parte before the lower authorities i.e. AO and the ld. CIT(A) and thus made no compliance nor filed any explanation to the queries raised by the Revenue authorities. The Bench feels that the burden of proof lay upon the assessee and he is required to offer the explanation to the satisfaction of the Revenue authorities but it was not done by the assessee. The Bench further noticed that the ld. CIT(A) and AO passed well reasoned speaking order and after going through the same, the Bench finds that no interference is VIMAL KUMAR JAIN VS ITO, WARD 1(2), KOTA required as the assessee has not rebutted the findings recorded by the Revenue Authorities . In this situation, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. 3.0 In the result, the appeal of the assesee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 25 /09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼ xxu Xkks;y ½ ¼MkWa-,l-lhrky{eh½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;dlnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 25/09/2025 *Mishra आदेश की प्रतिलिपिअग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू The Appellant- Shri Vimal Kumar Jain, Kota 1. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward 1(2), Kota 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 426/JP/2025) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,