Non-application of mind in remand direction led to setting aside a Tribunal order based on a non-existent precedent.

A remand direction requiring the Assessing Officer to follow a Tribunal order that had not yet been pronounced was held to suffer from complete non-application of mind. The court found that an order relying on a non-existent decision could not be justified and that the Tribunal's approach to the remand was therefore vitiated. The question of law was answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee, and the Tribunal's order was set aside with the matter remitted for reconsideration on merits and in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order was vitiated by non-application of mind in restoring the matter to the Assessing Officer with a direction to follow a Tribunal order that had not yet been pronounced.

Analysis: The direction to follow an order which was not in existence when the impugned order was passed could not be justified. Such a direction showed a complete absence of application of mind in the Tribunal's approach to the remand.

Conclusion: The question of law was answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was set aside and the matter was sent back to the Tribunal for reconsideration on merits and in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A remand direction based on an order not yet pronounced is vitiated by non-application of mind and cannot stand.

---