2021 (8) TMI 557

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of AO which is invalid and void ab-initio on the ground that the AO has failed to make the addition on those issues for which the Tribunal has set aside the appeal to the file of the AO and AO has made altogether different additions and thus exceeded his jurisdiction. 3. The facts in brief are that this is the second round of litigation. In the first round of litigation the Tribunal set aside the matter to the file of the AO by imposing cost of Rs. 25,000/- on the assessee for not attending the proceedings in the 1st round and thus directing the AO to frame the assessment denovo vide order dated 09.03.2018 in ITA No.1284/M/2018. However, while framing the assessment the AO has made altogether different additions which were not subject matt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the assessee to co-operate during the process of assessment. Despite such clear directions, if the assessee chose to be non-cooperative during the assessment proceedings, it cannot challenged the manner in which the assessment has been finalized. On the basis of the above discussion, ground of appeal no. 5 is dismissed" 4. After hearing the rival parties and perusing the material on record, we observe that undisputedly the additions made in the set aside assessment order passed under section 144 read with section 254 of the Act dated 27.11.2018 were totally different than what have been restored by the tribunal to the file of the AO vide order dated 09.03.2018 passed in ITA No.1284/M/2018. In our opinion the order of Ld. CIT(A) is not cor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the directions given by the Ld. CIT(A) while setting aside the original assessment order. As the AO has failed to carry out the legal duty to impose on him which has resulted into the destruction of a basic principle of natural justice, such action of the AO cannot be upheld. 18. The Ld. DR in the written submission has relied upon the decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ELEL Hotels and Investments ltd 2 SOT 659 stating that the powers of the CIT[A] are co=terminus with the powers of the Assessing Officer and CIT[A]can do what AO could do but has not done . However in the instant case the powers of the CIT[A] are not questioned but what has been questioned is the powers of the AO in framing a de novo assessment , when the origi....