Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and order appointing an arbitrator u/s 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It held that the dispute regarding non-payment of wages and the legality of the termination order was non-arbitrable as it fell under the jurisdiction of the statutory authorities under the Payment of Wages Act. The alleged violation of the non-disclosure obligation was an afterthought not raised in the show cause notice, inquiry report, or termination order, rendering it non-existent. Consequently, the respondent's petition u/s 11(6) was dismissed.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and order appointing an arbitrator u/s 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It held that the dispute regarding non-payment of wages and the legality of the termination order was non-arbitrable as it fell under the jurisdiction of the statutory authorities under the Payment of Wages Act. The alleged violation of the non-disclosure obligation was an afterthought not raised in the show cause notice, inquiry report, or termination order, rendering it non-existent. Consequently, the respondent's petition u/s 11(6) was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.