Inadequate reasoning in claim rejection made the Tribunal order unsustainable, warranting remand for fresh adjudication.

An order rejecting a claim must disclose clear reasons dealing with the material issues, including the nature of the rebate claimed, the basis of any alleged double benefit, and why the claim is said to be inadmissible. A bare rejection based only on basic facts is unsustainable where the reasoning is absent or inadequate. As the record also left factual issues unresolved, the matter was appropriately remanded for fresh consideration and determination by the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order rejecting the claim could be sustained when it did not disclose adequate reasons, and whether the matter required remand for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The impugned order was found to record only the basic facts and then proceed to reject the claim without explaining what rebate had been claimed, what the alleged double benefit was, or why the claim was not entertainable. The absence of reasons made the order unsustainable. As factual issues also remained, the matter was fit to be sent back for reconsideration.

Conclusion: The order of the Tribunal was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for rehearing and fresh determination.

---