Reasoned Appellate Orders are required; non speaking appellate orders should be set aside and remanded for fresh reasoned decision.

Appellate or quasi judicial orders subject to further challenge must record adequate reasons demonstrating application of mind; absence of relevant facts, opposing contentions, law applied or reasoning renders such orders unsustainable. Where an appeal under the statutory appeal provision (Section 35G) yields a non speaking order, the appropriate remedy is to set aside that order and remit the matter to the deciding tribunal or authority for a fresh, reasoned decision on merits within a specified time. The article concludes that orders vulnerable to further appeal must be reasoned and non reasoned appellate orders warrant remand for adjudication with reasons.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appellate order that contains no reasons or discussion is sustainable, and whether such an order must be set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh, reasoned decision.

Analysis: The impugned appellate order contains no statement of relevant facts, no summary of the decisions below, no statement of opposing contentions, no identification of law applied, and no reasons or citations supporting the conclusion. Established authorities require that orders subject to further appeal record reasons sufficient to indicate application of mind so that an appellate forum can examine the basis of the decision; absence of such reasons may render the order unsustainable and justify remand for a fresh adjudication. The statutory provision under which the appeal was filed is Section 35G of the Central Excise Act. The appropriate remedial measure where an appealable order is non-speaking is to set aside the order and remit the matter to the deciding authority for a reasoned decision on merits within a specified time.

Conclusion: The impugned order is not sustainable for lack of reasons; the appeal is allowed in favour of the Revenue and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision on merits with directions to pass a reasoned order.

Final Conclusion: Orders susceptible to further appeal must contain adequate reasons; where they do not, setting aside and remand for a reasoned decision is appropriate.

Ratio Decidendi: An appellate or quasi-judicial order that is subject to further challenge must record reasons sufficient to demonstrate application of mind; absence of such reasons renders the order unsustainable and warrants remand for a fresh, reasoned adjudication.

---