Pusa Nanda Kumar Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
Wrong CA Advice & Covid Delay Accepted—Tribunal Orders De-Novo Examination of 153A Addition with No Incriminating Material
Assessee filed appeal with 868-day delay against CIT(A)’s order sustaining addition of ₹1,17,50,000/- u/s 50C in search assessment u/s 153A. Delay-condonation petition & affidavit explained that earlier CA wrongly advised not to appeal; later Assessee attempted settlement under Vivad-se-Vishwas which was rejected due to prosecution u/s 276C(2); Covid-19 period further contributed to delay. Tribunal held that wrong professional advice, coupled with bona fide litigation conduct and SC’s Covid-limitation extension, constituted sufficient cause. Delay condoned subject to payment of ₹10,000/- to PMNRF.
On merits, Tribunal noted that sale deed dated 31.03.2007 showed Assessee signed only as Managing Director of Pusala Power Projects Pvt. Ltd., not as land owner; no incriminating material was found during search; and assessment for AY 2007-08 was completed, not pending, on search date (21.09.2012). Following SC in Abhisar Buildwell, addition u/s 50C in 153A without incriminating material was prima facie unsustainable. Assessee’s additional contentions—including (i) FMV objection under s.50C requiring DVO reference, (ii) incorrect year of taxability of ₹12 crore surrender, (iii) declaration under s.132(4) being retracted by affidavit—were all legally relevant.
Tribunal held these issues require detailed factual & legal verification. Entire matter remanded to CIT(A) for fresh de-novo adjudication on all grounds & additional grounds, after granting proper opportunity. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
