Reasoned Tribunal orders are mandatory before allowing CENVAT credit; cryptic findings were set aside and remanded.

A Tribunal order allowing CENVAT credit on services received from a foreign service provider was unsustainable because it gave no independent reasons and merely referred to earlier judgments. The HC held that, as the final fact-finding authority, the Tribunal must identify the relevant facts, frame the issues, and record its own reasoning after considering the applicable law and precedents. The appeal was allowed, the Tribunal's order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration through a detailed speaking order.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's cryptic order allowing CENVAT credit on services received from a foreign service provider could be sustained, and whether the matter required remand for a fresh decision by way of a speaking order.

Analysis: The Tribunal, being the final fact-finding authority, was required to discuss the relevant facts, identify the issues arising from those facts, and record its own reasons after considering the applicable law and precedents. A bare reference to earlier judgments without independent reasoning was held to be inadequate for appellate scrutiny.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was not sustainable. The Revenue's appeal was allowed, the order of the Tribunal was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and for passing a detailed speaking order.

---