Reasoned adjudication required: cryptic penalty reduction was unsustainable and the matter was remanded for fresh merits review.

A Tribunal order reducing penalty to 25% without discussing the rival contentions, relevant facts, applicable provisions, or reasons was held unsustainable. The Delhi HC found that a cryptic reduction of penalty while otherwise confirming the duty demand did not satisfy the standards of a proper adjudicatory order or natural justice. The matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration on merits through a reasoned order.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order reducing penalty to 25% without discussing the relevant facts, contentions, or reasons was sustainable in law.

Analysis: The impugned order confirmed the duty demand while reducing the penalty in a summary manner. It did not record the rival contentions, identify the relevant facts, refer to the applicable provisions, or disclose any reasoning for the reduction of penalty. Such a cryptic disposal failed to satisfy the requirements of a proper adjudicatory order and did not meet the parameters of law and natural justice.

Conclusion: The order was held unsustainable, the question of law was answered in the affirmative in favour of the appellant, and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision on merits by a reasoned order.

---