, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad , श्री विजय पाल राि उपाध् यक्ष एिं , श्री मिुसूदन सािडिया लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष ।

BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.814/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20)

Shri Farooqi Gulam Samdani, Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Vs. Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad.

PAN : AISPG5022C (Appellant) (Respondent)

निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A.

रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-AR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 11/11/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER MANJUNATHA G, A.M. :

This appeal is filed by Shri Farooqi Gulam Samdani (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Hyderabad-11 (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 13.03.2025 for the Assessment Year 2019-20.

2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :

3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and is in the business of construction activity filed his original return of income for the Assessment Year 2019-20 on 30.11.2020 declaring total income of Rs.4,93,200/-. A search and seizure operation u/s.132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) was conducted in the case of Mohd. AbdulSattar & Others on 22.11.2018 wherein certain incriminating evidences relating to the assessee were found and seized. The case was centralised to DCIT, Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad vide order u/s.127 of the Act dated 15.03.2023 issued by the Pr. CIT-1, Hyderabad. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.153C of the Act on 16.12.2022 through ITBA portal. There was no response to the notice issued to the assessee. Hence notices u/s.142(1) of the Act was issued on 22.02.2023 and 29.12.2023 calling for information. In response to the notice issued u/s.153C of the Act, the assessee filed his return of income on 09.02.2024 by admitting the income ofRs.4,93,200/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that, during search proceedings an agreement of sale dated 28.08.2018 was found and seized and marked as Annexure No.A/MAS/RES/02. As per this agreement of sale, Shri Mohd. Abdul Sattar had entered into an agreement of sale of land for a total consideration of Rs.10 Crores, out of which an amount of Rs.3.00 Crores was paid in the form of cash towards advance amount by the assessee and others. Moreover, as per the sale deed dated 28.08.2018, the same land admeasuring 5.12 acres was purchased by the assessee and one Anees Begum. As per the contents of the agreement of sale, seized/search documents, out of the total sale consideration of Rs.10 Crores, the seller had received Rs.3 Crores in cash from the assessee and his family. In this regard, the assessee was given a show cause notice on 05.03.2024 and called upon to explain the source. In response to the notice, the assessee submitted that the land has been purchased vide sale deed for sale consideration of Rs.1 Crore and the same has been paid through banking channel. Further, the assessee submitted that he never had paid any cash for consideration of Rs.3 Crores. The Assessing Officer after considering the relevant seized documents and observed that the assessee has paid advance of Rs.3 Crores by way of cash for purchase of property and source for the same has not been explained. Therefore by taking note of relevant seized material, made addition of Rs.1.50 Crores being 50% share of the assessee towards sale consideration paid in cash for purchase of property as unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act.

4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee challenged the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153C of the Act dated 13.03.2024 in light of notice issued u/s.153C dated 16.12.2022 and argued that notice issued