Reasoned quasi-judicial orders are mandatory; a non-speaking rejection of objections was set aside and remanded.

A quasi-judicial authority must give reasons when rejecting objections, because a speaking order shows that the facts and law were considered and allows effective appellate review. Here, the Dispute Resolution Panel's order did not address the assessee's objections on merits and was not reasoned. The non-speaking rejection could not be sustained, so the order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Dispute Resolution Panel's non-speaking order rejecting the assessee's objections could be sustained and whether the matter was required to be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The order of the Dispute Resolution Panel did not deal with the assessee's objections in a reasoned manner. A quasi-judicial determination must record reasons so that the affected party knows why relief has been denied and the appellate forum can examine whether the facts and law were properly considered. Where the order is bereft of reasons, it cannot be sustained. In the facts, the objections raised by the assessee were not adjudicated on merits and the matter required reconsideration.

Conclusion: The non-speaking order was set aside and the issues were remitted to the Dispute Resolution Panel for readjudication.

Ratio Decidendi: A quasi-judicial authority must pass a reasoned order while deciding disputed claims, and an order lacking reasons is liable to be set aside and remanded.

---