Tribunal deleted the addition made protective assessment made in the case of the company. Against the order of the Tribunal the revenue has filed an appeal before the High Court which was admitted by High Court. Revenue has filed miscellaneous application before the Tribunal for not deciding the question of remaining part of the profit whether to be taxed on substantive basis.  Revenue’s miscellaneous application was allowed.  The assessee filed writ petition against the order of Tribunal recalling the order in miscellaneous application. Allowing the petition the Court held that the Tribunal was conscious about three aspects of the matter and gave findings on all three aspects and gave reasons for holding that the remaining amount could not be taxed in the hands of the company. Accordingly whether these conclusions were correct or incorrect the High Court would decide in the Department’s tax appeal which had been admitted. This was not a case where the Tribunal had failed to decide an important issue arising in the appeals or the consideration of the Tribunal suffered from an error apparent on the record. The order of the Tribunal was not valid. (followed T.S. Balaram v ITO ( 1971) 82 ITR 50 (SC), CCE v. RDC Concrete (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2001) 10 GSTR 387 (SC) (2011) 12 SCC 166)