IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T(SS).A. No.255/Ind/2019 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Smt. Reena Upadhyay D55-56, Akriti Garden, Nehru Nagar, Bhopal (M.P.) Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, Bhopal PAN No.AAYPU8131C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Advocate with Shri Gagan Tiwari, Adv. Respondent by : None Date of Hearing 22.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 28.09.2022 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 03.09.2019 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 3, Bhopal arising out of the order dated 28.01.2015 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-1, Bhopal under section 153A IT(SS)A No.255/Ind/2019 (Smt. Reena Upadhyay vs. DCIT) Asst.Year.– 2010-11 - 2 - r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. This matter relates to addition of Rs.36Lakhs under Section 69B of the Act on the ground of excess investment in purchase of Land No.201 at Saurya Darshan Appartment, Indore. 3. We have heard the Ld.AR. The Ld.DR sought for adjournment today. We have already heard the Ld.DR on 13.09.2022. However, keeping in view of physical Bench after more than 2 years, we decline to allow such adjournment as prayed for. 4. It appears from the record and also submitted by Ld. AR that the assessee has purchased a property @ Rs.35Lakhs. The Revenue’s case is this that the same is much lower than the real market rate. The AO worked out the market rate of the said property at Rs.71 Lakhs on this count. He took reference of the property being a residential house purchased by one Jagdish Dhaneriya from one Shri Govind Manglal, Gopal Manglal and Sanjay Manglal on 10.04.2010 of Rs.5Lakhs. Upon issuance of notice under Section 131 of the Act on those three parties statement was recorded on oath on 23.01.2015 who stated to have sold the property at Rs.17Lakhs though the registration was made only on consideration of Rs.5Lakhs. Thus, the purchaser has given on-money to the tune of Rs.12Lakhs as of the opinion of the Ld. AO and applying this analogy the addition to the tune of Rs.36 Lakhs has been made in the hand of the assessee on amount of on-money paid in IT(SS)A No.255/Ind/2019 (Smt. Reena Upadhyay vs. DCIT) Asst.Year.– 2010-11 - 3 - purchase of the property in question. The Ld. CIT(A) further confirmed the same. 5. However, we do not find that the assessee has been given any opportunity to confront such reference made by the Ld.AO. No valid document is also forthcoming from the Revenue which would at all justify the payment of on-money Rs.36 Lakhs which has been added by the Revenue only on the basis of surmises and junctures. Hence, in the absence of any valid document, we do not find any reason or justification in making such addition, the addition is, therefore, deleted. 6. In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 28/09/2022 Sd/- Sd/- (BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Indore; Dated 28/09/2022 S. K. Sinha, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुᲦ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Indore 6. गाडᭅ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Indore