Reasoned order requirement controls licence refusal where the authority ignored the value-based advance licence distinction and remitted the matter.

An order refusing to grant or renew a licence was found unsustainable because it did not address the petitioners' claim that they held a value-based advance licence, not a quantity-based advance licence. The authority relied on a notice demanding customs duty and interest for alleged excess exports, but gave no reasoned linkage between the submissions made, including reliance on paragraph 110 of the Handbook of Procedures, and the final conclusion. Because the refusal carried serious civil consequences, the authority was required to disclose the basis of its decision. The order was set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration after prior notice and a reasoned order.

---

---

Issues: Whether an order refusing to grant or renew a licence could be sustained when it did not address the petitioners' contention that they held a value-based advance licence and not a quantity-based advance licence.

Analysis: The impugned order was founded on a notice demanding customs duty and interest on alleged excess exports, but it failed to deal with the petitioners' specific reliance on paragraph 110 of the Handbook of Procedures and the distinction between value-based and quantity-based advance licences. The absence of any linkage between the recorded submissions and the final conclusion rendered the order unreasoned. In view of the serious civil consequences of the refusal, the authority was required to disclose the basis for its decision.

Conclusion: The order was set aside and the matter was directed to be reconsidered by the authority after prior notice and by passing a reasoned order.

---