Jeeta Ram vs. ITO, Ward-1(3)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Jeet Ram, was found to have undisclosed income based on information received through AIMS. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which Jeet Ram did not respond to. The AO determined Jeet Ram's income at Rs.1,07,72,214/- under sections 147 and 144 of the Act, treating certain cash deposits as unexplained money under section 69A. Jeet Ram appealed against this order, which was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Jeet Ram further appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, arguing that the assessment was erroneous and that he was not given a fair opportunity to be heard.…

Legal Issues

• 1. The assessee argues that the total income determined by the Income Tax Officer was erroneous.
• 2. Jeet Ram claims that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal without considering the merits.
• 3. Jeet Ram argues that the order is contrary to the principles of natural justice as he was not given a fair opportunity to be heard.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Shiksha Se Shikhar Tak Vs CIT(Exemption)

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2026-27Allowed

• ITA 6162/DEL/2026

  Delhi bench

• Gurbachan Kaur vs. The ITO

  Chandigarh bench

• Palani Selvam Shunmuga Ananth vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Chennai bench

• Rajender Singh vs. ITO, Ward 45 (1)

  Delhi bench

• Subhash Gupta vs. ITO, Ward 1 (4)

  Delhi Bench ‘G’ benchAY 2018-19Allowed