Allowing the appeals the Court held   that after the matter was remanded to the Tribunal, it called for information in terms of which direction, affidavit was filed on behalf of the assessee and a note was submitted on behalf of the Department. The affidavit made the position clear and in the entirety of the process including framing of the second question, the challenge with regard to the method of accounting was quite apparent. The submission advanced on behalf of the assessee was therefore required to be dealt with on the merits. However, neither the affidavit nor the note was referred to by the Tribunal. The conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal were thus not consistent with the order of remand passed by the court or with the direction issued by the Tribunal itself seeking certain information. The High Court also erred in affirming the view taken by the Tribunal. Therefore, the orders passed by the Tribunal and the High Court were to be set aside and the matter remitted to the Tribunal to consider the matter afresh in the light of the order dated April 24, 1996 passed by the court and in keeping with the direction issued by the Tribunal in its order dated May 5, 2008. (AY. 1985-86, 1989-90 and 1993-94)