आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण Ûयायपीठ रायपुर म(cid:581)।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.229/RPR/2025 (cid:467)नधा(cid:91)रण वष (cid:91) / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Golecha Promoters Developers and Builders Private Limited

53, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 PAN: AAACG8527H ........अपीलाथ(cid:568) / Appellant बनाम / V/s.

The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.)

……(cid:292)×यथ(cid:568) / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Bikram Jain, CA Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Hearing : 19.06.2025 घोषणा क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Pronouncement : 20.06.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM:

The captioned appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 28.03.2025 for the assessment year 2008-09 as per the following grounds of appeal:

“1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the order of the A.O wherein the Ld. A.O erred in initiating proceeding u/s 148 without providing the so called agreement on the basis of which the case has been reopened. Therefore the order passed by the A.O. and sustained by the CIT-Appeal is unjustified, unwarranted and uncalled for.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition made by the A.O. without considering the additional evidences submitted by the assesse. Therefore the addition sustained by the CIT- Appeal without considering the additional evidences is unjustified, unwarranted and uncalled for.

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the order of the A.O wherein the Ld.AO has erred in treating the sale consideration of land sold at Devpuri at Rs.3,12,57,321/-, on the basis of forged document, in place of actual sale consideration of Rs.84,00,000/- and therefore added Rs.2,58,27,321/- in the hands of the assesse's income. The addition made by the A.O. and sustained by the CIT-Appeal is unjustified, unwarranted and uncalled for.

4. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend or alter any grounds of appeal at any time of hearing.”

2. The brief facts in this case are that the assessee had filed its return of income on 29.09.2008, declaring an income of Rs.88,96,350/-. Subsequently, proceedings u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). Notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 23.03.2024. In reply, the assessee submitted that the return of income filed on 29.09.2008 may be treated as returned filed in response to the said notice.

3. Reassessment proceedings was completed by the A.O vide his order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act wherein an addition was made by the A.O of Rs.2,58,27,321/- on account of sale consideration of land sold at Devpuri at Rs.3,12,57,321/- on the basis of forged document in lieu of actual sale consideration of Rs.84,00,000/-. For the sake of completeness, the observations of the A.O are culled out as follows:

“6. Statement of Shri Rajesh Golechha was also recorded on 19.03.2016 and he denied to have entered into said agreement also receipt of any amount as indicated in the agreement. Precisely the assessee has denied to have entered into any agreement as referred in the copy of agreement made on Stamp Paper worth Rs.100/- bearing Serial No. 913336 on 28.04.2007. At the same time he did not challenge genuineness of the agreement on any grounds. The denial is not supported by any corroborative material with respect to the evidences brought on record. On the other hid the subsequent circumstances and evidences relating to the land referred to in the agreement dated 28.04.2007 also render support to the genuineness of the agreement. Same land was sold and registered in favour of M/s.Sankalp Realities through partner Shri Sunil Kumar Khetan along with Shri Bima