IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 
 . 
   ITA 485/2013  
 . 
 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL - II 
 . 
 ..... Appellant 
 . 
 Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. 
 Standing Counsel. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 versus 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 AKME PRJECTS LTD. 
 . 
 ..... Respondent 
 . 
 Through Mr. Piyush Kaushik, Advocate. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 CORAM: 
 . 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA 
 . 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 O R D E R 
 . 
     06.11.2013 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 The findings of the tribunal are factual.  The Assessing Officer had 
 relied upon an unsigned agreement, which was found during the course of 
 survey and did not proceed further by examining the person, who had 
 drafted the agreement or the witnesses.  The first appellate authority 
 and the tribunal, on the other hand, have relied upon several factors to 
 hold that the draft agreement was not executed/signed and implemented. 
 There were separate transactions with third parties and the transaction 
 between the assessee and United Special Ispat Limited was only in respect 
 of 5.431 acres of land and not for 75 acres of land subject matter of the 
 draft agreement.  We also notice that the Assessing Officer did not make 
 addition of Rs.3 crores, the amount mentioned in the ?draft agreement to 
 sell? but addition of Rs.1.15 crores was made.  The draft agreement to 
 sell could have been the starting point of investigation and further 
 detailed verification, which has not been carried out.  In the absence of 
 . 
 the said investigation and evidence, it is not possible to hold that the orders passed by the first appellate authority and the tribunal are 
 perverse.  We also note that the stand of the respondent-assessee has 
 been consistent.  The appeal is accordingly dismissed. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 SANJIV KHANNA, J. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. 
 . 
 NOVEMBER 06, 2013 
 . 
 VKR 
 . 
 $ 23 to 25. 
 .