https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217205 Section 69B requires the Assessing Officer to first establish, on evidence, that the assessee actually expended more than the amount recorded in the books; only then can the burden shift to the assessee. A valuation drawn from Rule 3 of Part B of the Third Schedule to the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 cannot replace proof of actual extra consideration under the Income-tax Act. In the absence of incriminating material showing understatement of purchase price, and where the revenue relied only on valuation, high rental yield, or perceived market value, the addition cannot be sustained because section 69B does not permit taxation on a notional or fictional basis. en-us Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Aug 2025 14:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217205 Section 69B requires the Assessing Officer to first establish, on evidence, that the assessee actually expended more than the amount recorded in the books; only then can the burden shift to the assessee. A valuation drawn from Rule 3 of Part B of the Third Schedule to the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 cannot replace proof of actual extra consideration under the Income-tax Act. In the absence of incriminating material showing understatement of purchase price, and where the revenue relied only on valuation, high rental yield, or perceived market value, the addition cannot be sustained because section 69B does not permit taxation on a notional or fictional basis. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217205