ITO, Erode V. V.Saravanan, Erode

ITA 362/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1158 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 27-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J PAVITHRAN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Non passing of speaking order; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 143(2); 44AB; 131; 144

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: CHENNAI . . . , ! , & BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 ' ' /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), ERODE. V . SHRI V. SARAVANAN, PROP. PATTU LEATHERS, NO.34, BHAVANI MAIN ROAD, ERODE-638 011. [PAN: APDPS8476E ] ( * /APPELLANT) ( +,* /RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : MR. J.PAVITHRAN KUMAR, JCIT ASSESSEE BY : MR. S.SRIDHAR, ADV. . /DATE OF HEARING : 30.09.2019 . /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.12.2019 / O R D E R PER RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST APPELLATE ORDER DATED 16.11.2015 PASSED BY LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3, COIMBATORE (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE CIT(A)), IN IT APPEAL NO.113/14-15(A)1 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2011-12, THE APPELLATE PROCEED INGS BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD ARISEN FROM ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.02.2014 P ASSED BY LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE AO) U/ S.144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE ACT). ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 :- 2 -: 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY REVENUE IN MEMO OF APPEAL FILED WITH THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE TRIBUNAL) READ AS UNDER:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED C1T(A) IS NOT ACCEPTA BLE ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE AD DITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MAINTAINED TWO SETS OF BALANCE SHEET A ND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT., ONE FOR FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME AND O THER SUBMITTED TO THE BANK. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FAC T THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN SPIT E OF HAVING GIVEN SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES. 5. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FAC T THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF THE PROPER EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHY THERE IS VARIATION IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE BANK AND TO THE DEPARTMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER W AS FORCED TO ADOPT THE HIGHER FIGURES. 6. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN THE CORRECT FIGURE EVEN IN R ESPECT OF THE CC ACCOUNT WITH INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK. ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 :- 3 -: 7. FOR THE ABOVE REASONS AND ANY OTHER REASONS TH AT MAY BE ADDUCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT IS PRAYED THAT T HE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) MAY KINDLY BE QUASHED AND ASSESSMENT ORD ER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RE STORED. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN ANIMAL LEATHERS WET BLUES/SKINS. THE ASSESSEE FILE D HIS RETURN OF INCOME WITH REVENUE FOR IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR ON 01.10.2011 DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 4,67,710/- . THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PICKED BY REVENUE FOR FRAMING SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 14 3(2) OF THE 1961 ACT. SEVERAL STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED BY AO TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APP EAR BEFORE THE AO. THE SUMMONS U/S 131 OF THE 1961 ACT WERE ALSO ISSUED BY AO TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BUT THE ASSESS EE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AO IN COMPLIANCES OF THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE AO. THE DETAILS OF STATUTORY NOTICES/SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE AO FROM TIME TO TIME DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE ELABORATELY MENTIONED I N PAGE 2-4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO . THE AO IN THE M EAN TIME OBTAINED DETAILS DIRECTLY FROM BANKERS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH REFLECT ED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ONE DIFFERENT SET OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS WITH THE BANKERS FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND THERE WERE VARIATIONS IN TH E FIGURES AS MENTIONED IN FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE IN RETURN OF INCOME FILED WITH REVENUE AND THE FIGURES AS FOUND MENTIONED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BANK FOR OBTAINING LOANS/LIMITS.THE ASSESSEE WAS MAINTAINING CASH CREDIT(LOAN) ACCOUNT AS WELL SAVING BANK ACCOUNT WITH ITS BANKERS. SINCE, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT FORTH COMING BEFORE THE AO DURING ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 :- 4 -: THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS NO DETAILS WERE SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO, IT LED TO FRAMING OF BEST JUDGMENT A SSESSMENT BY AO U/S 144 OF THE 1961 ACT. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLOSED CASH CREDIT ACCOUNT WITH CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK DURING THE YEAR UNDER CON SIDERATION AND HAS OBTAINED NEW CASH CREDIT LIMIT/LOAN FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BAN K DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE AO OBSERVED THAT IN THIS CONNECT ION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED ITS RETURN OF INCOME, BALANCE SHEET, PROF IT AND LOSS , 44AB DULY CERTIFIED BY THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS PERTAINING T O THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION TO ITS BANKERS. THE AO OBSERVED THAT WHEN ENTRIES I N THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE TO ITS BA NKERS ARE MATCHED WITH ENTRIES IN RETURN OF INCOME, THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFF ERENCES IN VARIOUS ACCOUNTS WHICH ARE ELABORATELY EXTRACTED BY THE AO AT PAGE 3 1 33 OF ITS ASSESSMENT ORDER. THIS LED TO SEVERAL ADDITIONS BEING MADE BY AO IN T HE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.02.2014 PAS SED EX-PARTE BY AO U/S 144 OF THE 1961 ACT, LEADING TO ASSESSED INCOME OF RS. 3,36,49,526/- IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS AGAINST RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 4,67,710/- . THUS, HIGH PITCHED ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY AO AGAINST THE ASS ESSEE EX-PARTE BASED ON THE TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF ACCOUNTS BEING ALLEGEDLY MAINTAINED BY ASSESSEE VIZ. ONE SET OF ACCOUNTS FOR REVENUE AND SECOND SET OF A CCOUNTS FOR BANKERS FOR OBTAINING LOAN/LIMIT FROM THE BANKS. 4. THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED BY AN EX-PARTE HIGH PITCHED ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY AO U/S 144 OF THE 1961 ACT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE FILED FIRST APPEAL WITH LEARNED CIT(A) . THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE LEARN ED CIT(A) AND MADE ITS SUBMISSIONS. THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS PLEASED TO GRA NT SUBSTANTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AND APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PARTLY ALLO WED BY LEARNED CIT(A) VIDE ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 :- 5 -: APPELLATE ORDER DATED 16.11.2015 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A). THE LEARNED CIT(A) NOTED THAT THERE ARE TWO SETS OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY ASSESSEE ONE FOR BANK FOR OBTAINING LOANS AND SECOND FOR FILING INCOME-TAX RE TURN. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE AO CANNOT PICK AND CHOOSE FIGURES TO SUIT ITS CONVENIENCE AS THE AO HAD ADOPTED GP RATIO FROM RETURN OF INCOME F ILED WITH REVENUE WHILE OTHER DIFFERENTIAL FIGURES WERE ADOPTED FROM THE FI NANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS PREPARED FOR BANKS. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HELD THAT TH E FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TO TH E BANK BE TAKEN AS BASIS FOR FRAMING ASSESSMENT AND ALSO DIFFERENTIAL IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT IN TWO SETS OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS BE TREATED AS INCOME OF THE ASS ESSEE, VIDE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 16.11.2015. 5. NOW, REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY RELIEF GRANTED BY L EARNED CIT(A) AND AN APPEAL IS FILED WITH TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED DR OPENED ARGUM ENTS AND SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT THIS IS FIRST ROUND OF LITIGATION. I T WAS AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT NON SPEAKING ORDER IS PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) WHIC H COULD NOT BE SUSTAINED IN LAW. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS SUPPRES SING SALES AND INTRODUCED CAPITAL FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES . IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED DR THAT TWO SETS OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE MAINTAINED BY ASSESSEE , ONE FOR REVENUE AND ONE SET OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE MAINTAINED FOR BANKS FOR OBTAINING LOANS. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTE D FOR FRAMING SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE T HE AO AND NO DETAILS WERE SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COUR SE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS . OUR ATTENTIONS WAS DRAWN TO THE ASSES SMENT ORDER WHEREIN THE AO HAS MENTIONED THAT SEVERAL STATUTORY NOTICES AS WEL L SUMMONS U/S 131 OF THE 1961 ACT WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BUT DESPITE SU FFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES BEING ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 :- 6 -: GRANTED TO ASSESSEE BY THE AO , THE ASSESSEE DID NO T CO-OPERATED WITH AO AND DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AO WHEREIN NO DETAILS WER E SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS, WHICH LED TO AN EX- PARTE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO U/S 144 OF THE 1961 ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO ADOPTED GP RATIO DECLARED BY ASSESSEE IN RETURN OF INCOME FILED WITH REVENUE AND APPLIED THE SAME TO S ALES DECLARED IN SECOND SET OF ACCOUNTS FILED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE BANK. THE LEARNED DR WOULD SUBMIT THAT THE AO CORRECTLY FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT AS THE ASSES SEE WAS NOT COMING FORTH DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT AND NO DETAILS WERE FURNISHED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS AND HENCE AO WAS FORCED TO PASS AN EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 144 OF THE 1961 ACT. HOWEVER, IT WAS FAIRLY SUBMITTED BY LEARNED DR THAT THE ENTI RE ISSUES BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRAMING FRESH ASSESSMENT DENOVO AND THE ASSESSEE BE DIRECTED TO CO-OPERATE WITH REVENUE IN SECOND ROUND OF LITIG ATION. 5.2 THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTH ER HAND DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PARA 6.3/PAGE 4 OF LEARNED CIT(A) APPELLATE ORDER. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS SUSTAINE D ADDITIONS TO THE DIFFERENTIAL IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT IN TWO SET OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINE D BY ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSE E DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND NO DETAILS WERE FURNISHED BY ASSESSE EENTIRE ISSUES BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DENOVO ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS . IT WA S FAIRLY SUBMITTED BY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE THAT IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRAMING DENOVO ASSESSMENT , THEN THE ASSESSEE W ILL CO-OPERATE WITH AO IN ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 :- 7 -: SECOND ROUND OF LITIGATION AND SUBMIT ALL DETAILS/E XPLANATIONS AS WILL BE REQUIRED BY THE AO. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE HAVE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE B USINESS OF TRADING IN ANIMAL LEATHERS WET BLUES/SKINS. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS R ETURN OF INCOME WITH REVENUE FOR IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR ON 01.10.2011 DECLARIN G INCOME OF RS. 4,67,710/- . THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED BY REVENUE FOR FRAMING SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 143(2) OF T HE 1961 ACT. SEVERAL STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED BY AO TO THE ASSESSEE BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AO AND CONSEQUENTIALLY NO DETAILS WERE FURNISHED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS . THE S UMMONS U/S 131 OF THE 1961 ACT WERE ALSO ISSUED BY THE AO TO THE ASSESSEE BUT THE ASSESSEE STILL DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE DETAILS OF STATUTORY NOTICES AS WELL SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE AO ARE ELABORATELY MENTIONED IN PAGE 2-4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE AO IN THE MEAN TIME OBTAINED DETAILS DIRECTLY FROM BANKERS OF THE ASSES SEE WHICH REFLECTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ONE DIFFERENT SET OF FINANCIAL S TATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS WITH THE BANKERS FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND THERE WERE VARIATIONS IN THE FIGURES AS MENTIONED IN FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS SUBMI TTED IN RETURN OF INCOME FILED WITH REVENUE AND THE FIGURES AS FOUND MENTIONED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BANK. THE ASSESSEE WAS MAINTAINING CASH CREDIT(LOAN) ACCOUNT AS WELL SAVING BANK ACCOU NT WITH ITS BANKERS NAMELY CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK AND INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK. SINC E, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT FORTHCOMING BEFORE THE AO , IT LED TO FRAMING OF AN EX-PARTE BEST JUDGMENT HIGH PITCHED ASSESSMENT BY THE AO U/S 144 OF THE 1961 AC T. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 :- 8 -: ASSESSEE HAS CLOSED CASH CREDIT ACCOUNT WITH CATHOL IC SYRIAN BANK DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND HAS OBTAINED NEW CASH CREDIT LIMIT/LOAN FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE AO OBSERVED THAT IN THIS CONNECTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED ITS RETURN O F INCOME, BALANCE SHEET, PROFIT AND LOSS , 44AB DULY CERTIFIED BY THE CHARTE RED ACCOUNTANTS PERTAINING TO THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION TO ITS BANKERS. THE AO OBSERVED THAT WHEN ENTRIES IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED TO B ANKERS ARE MATCHED WITH ENTRIES IN RETURN OF INCOME FILED WITH REVENUE , TH ERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENCES IN VARIOUS ACCOUNTS WHICH ARE ELABORATELY EXTRACTED BY THE AO AT PAGE 31 33 OF ITS ASSESSMENT ORDER. THIS LED TO SEVERAL ADDITIONS TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BEING MADE BY AO IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.02.2014 PASSED EX-PARTE BY AO U/S 1 44 OF THE 1961 ACT, LEADING TO ASSESSED INCOME OF RS. 3,36,49,526/- IN THE HAND S OF THE ASSESSEE AS AGAINST RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 4,67,710/- . THUS, HIGH PITC HED ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY THE AO AGAINST THE ASSESSEE EX-PARTE BASED ON TW O DIFFERENT SETS OF ACCOUNTS BEING ALLEGEDLY MAINTAINED BY ASSESSEE VIZ. ONE SET FOR REVENUE AND SECOND SET FOR BANK FOR OBTAINING LOAN/LIMIT FROM THE BANKS. T HE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO BANKERS CAN BE TAKEN AS BASIS FOR FRAMING ASSESSMENT AND THE AO WAS NOT COR RECT IN ADOPTING GP RATIO AS DECLARED IN RETURN OF INCOME FILED WITH REVENUE AND THEN APPLYING THE SAME TO SALES DECLARED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE TO ITS BANKERS . THE ADDITIONS TO CAPITAL WERE ALSO CONFIR MED BY LEARNED CIT(A). WE HAVE OBSERVED THAT ADMITTEDLY BECAUSE OF FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE AO , AN HIGH PITCHED EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT IS FRAMED AGAINST ASSESSEE WHEREIN ASSESSED INCOME WAS RS. 3,36,49,526/- AS A GAINST RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 4,67,710/- , MAINLY BASED ON RECOVERY OF ALLEGE D TWO SETS OF BOOKS OF ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 :- 9 -: ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY ASSESSEE , ONE FOR FILING RE TURN OF INCOME AND SECOND FOR BANKERS FOR OBTAINING LOANS/LIMITS . THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED IS EX-PARTE AND LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALSO PASSED BALD CRYPTIC ORDER W HEREIN DETAILED SPEAKING AND REASONED ORDER WAS NOT PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A). IT IS AN ADMITTED POSITION THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CO-OPERATED WITH AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS VARIOUS STATUTORY NOTICES/SUMMONS IS SUED BY AO DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE NOT COMPLIED WITH. IT I S FAIRLY AGREED BY BOTH THE PARTIES BEFORE US THAT THE ENTIRE MATTER NEEDED TO BE REMANDED BACK TO FILE OF THE AO FOR FRAMING DENOVO ASSESSMENT. WE AFTER CONS IDERING ENTIRE FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE AND AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTI ES ARE ALSO OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ENTIRE MATTER NEEDED TO BE RESTORED T O THE FILE OF AO FOR FRAMING FRESH ASSESSMENT DE-NOVO. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CO-O PERATED IN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND NO DETAILS WERE FURNISHED BY ASSESS EE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS . THE AO IN THE ABSENCE OF CO-OPERATIO N FROM THE AO PASSED EX- PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER BASED ON DIFFERENTIAL IN TWO SET OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ALLEGEDLY MAINTAINED BY ASSESSE. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALSO PASSED A CRYPTIC NON SPEAKING NON REASONED ORDER GRANTING SUBSTANTIA L RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE.BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE FAIRLY AGREED THAT UNDER THE CIRCU MSTANCES , MATTER NEED TO BE REMANDED BACK TO AO FOR FRAMING FRESH ASSESSMENT DE NOVO. WE CONCUR WITH THE SAME. THUS ORDERS PASSED BY BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BE LOW ARE SET ASIDE AND MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRAMING FRESH ASSESSMENT DENOVO. HOWEVER, WE CLARIFY THAT IT IS AN OPEN REMAND AND ALL THE CO NTENTIONS/ ISSUES WHICH HAD ARISEN OR WHICH MAY ARISE IN THE DENOVO ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE KEPT OPEN. WE DIRECT ASSESSEE TO CO-OPERATE WITH AO IN FRAMING FRESH ASSESSMENT DENOVO AND IF IN SET ASIDE REMAND ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS C ONDUCTED BY AO TO FRAME DENOVO ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CO-OPERATE, THE AO SHALL BE FREE TO ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 :- 10 -: FRAME DENOVO ASSESSMENT ON MERIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BASED ON MATERIAL ON RECORD. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE AO SHALL GIVE PROP ER AND ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN DENOVO ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN ACCORDANCE WI TH LAW AND ALL EVIDENCES/ EXPLANATIONS FILED BY ASSESSEE IN DENOVO SET ASIDE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WILL BE ADMITTED BY THE AO AND BE DECIDED ON MERITS IN A CCORDANCE WITH LAW. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 7 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE IN ITA NO.362/CHNY/2016 FOR AY: 2011-12 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 18 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ! ) (RAMIT KOCHAR) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, 0 /DATED: 18 TH DECEMBER, 2019. TLN . +!1 21 /COPY TO: 1. * /APPELLANT 4. 3 /CIT 2. +,* /RESPONDENT 5. 1 + /DR 3. 3 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. ' /GF