Assessing Officer jurisdiction after statutory transfer invalidates reassessment notices issued by transferor officers and nullifies resulting proceed...
Consequential appeal-effect orders must implement rectification deleting working-capital adjustments and reconsider the resulting arm's-length range c...
Discounted cash flow valuation protects share premium where projections are reasonable, while audited book expenses defeat unexplained-expenditure add...
Section 54 construction relief survives pre-transfer commencement when completion occurs within the statutory period, excluding ineligible spouse-owne...
Fraud classification show-cause notices founded on inconclusive forensic audit material cannot sustain action, permitting fresh proceedings on conclus...
Page of 4888
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 97750 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Arbitral sittings at Cuttack, chosen merely for the arbitrator's...
Juridical seat versus arbitral venue determines supervisory court jurisdiction, while timely award challenges remain within the prescribed limitation period.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Arbitral sittings at Cuttack, chosen merely for the arbitrator's convenience, constituted a venue rather than the juridical seat and did not give Cuttack courts supervisory jurisdiction. An arbitrator's appointment by a High Court exercising statewide jurisdiction did not confine jurisdiction to courts at its location or trigger exclusive jurisdiction under Section 42 on that basis. The contractual forum clause made the District Judge where the work was executed competent to hear applications to set aside the award. Applications filed within the prescribed three-month period were not time-barred.
Arbitral sittings at Cuttack, chosen merely for the arbitrator's convenience, constituted a venue rather than the juridical seat and did not give Cuttack courts supervisory jurisdiction. An arbitrator's appointment by a High Court exercising statewide jurisdiction did not confine jurisdiction to courts at its location or trigger exclusive jurisdiction under Section 42 on that basis. The contractual forum clause made the District Judge where the work was executed competent to hear applications to set aside the award. Applications filed within the prescribed three-month period were not time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.