Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the arbitral award was patently illegal due to manifest disregard of contract terms. The court's jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is limited to examining the correctness of Section 34 proceedings. The impugned judgment correctly set aside the awards by finding that the arbitral tribunal ignored explicit contractual clauses and misinterpreted the General Conditions of Contract. The court emphasized that when contract terms are unambiguous, prior negotiations should not be considered, and interpretations defeating the contract's purpose cannot be sustained. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed without cost.
HC held that the arbitral award was patently illegal due to manifest disregard of contract terms. The court's jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is limited to examining the correctness of Section 34 proceedings. The impugned judgment correctly set aside the awards by finding that the arbitral tribunal ignored explicit contractual clauses and misinterpreted the General Conditions of Contract. The court emphasized that when contract terms are unambiguous, prior negotiations should not be considered, and interpretations defeating the contract's purpose cannot be sustained. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed without cost.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
