Allowing the petition against order under section. 263  the Court held that the order contained contradictory statements in paragraphs 4 and 5 regarding submission of assessee’s reply while paragraph 4 stated no reply was submitted, paragraph 5 asserted submission of reply by assessee. There was an apparent violation of principles of natural justice, as no opportunity was given to assessee for defending or presenting its case, impugned order could not be sustained in eyes of law. Further since impugned order did not refer any finding as enumerated in Explanation-II of section 263 to suggest that assessment order was prejudicial to interest of revenue, it could not be sustained in eyes of law. Revenue is also directed to pay cost of Rs.10000.  (AY. 2017-18)