Tribunal held that at the time of search, the Department found two documents, one a registered sale deed and another the agreement to sell.  The consideration mentioned in the documents was different.  It was natural to presume that when the transaction was complete by registering the document, the parties could have changed the value in terms of the agreement to sell.  That was the original arrangement between the parties. In the given case, all the three transactions were complete.  Accordingly, the CIT(A) had come to the conclusion that the assessee could have adhered to the clauses in the agreement to sell.  The assessee had brought to the notice in the case of L that the Department had agreed with the value of sale consideration in terms of the registered sale deed and completed the assessment.  For the same transaction, the Department could not treat two different figures as sale consideration.  Therefore, the AO was directed to determine the sale consideration adopted for L and consider the same value as sale consideration in the case of the assessee also.  Similarly, the Assessing Officer was directed to verify the other two cases and determine the sale consideration adopted for the other two parties and determine the same sale consideration as the proper value of consideration in the case of the assessee.  (AY.  2007-08, 2008-09 )