The CIT(A) held that there was no incriminating material found during search in case of buyer nor any material has been brought on record by the AO in the present case during assessment and therefore the AO was not justified in making addition in the present case. It was further held that as per the provisions of section 50C of the Act, where date of agreement and date of registration is different (as in the present case) the stamp duty value can be taken but only in case where consideration or part thereof has been received before the date of agreement. However, in the present case, even though the condition laid down by section 50C was not satisfied, CIT(A) held that Assessee’s case is covered by section 50C and hence deleted the addition made by the AO. Tribunal upheld the finding of CIT(A) that no addition could be made in the present case in absence of any incriminating material and accordingly deleted the addition made by the AO. However, on merits of the case, Tribunal held that the Assessee had received a small consideration at the time of agreement and therefore CIT(A) finding to the extent that Assessee would get benefit of proviso of section 50C of the Act was incorrect. In the result, the addition made was deleted by the Tribunal though on merits of the case, Tribunal ruled against the Assessee. (AY. 2010-11)