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" ?
The SC held that once a sole arbitrator is appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court ceases to have jurisdiction to entertain further applications related to the arbitration proceedings, including prayers for non-signatories to intervene or remain present. The applications by non-signatories seeking such permission were deemed misconceived and an abuse of process, as the Act does not provide for observers or intervention by non-parties in arbitration. The impugned order permitting non-signatories to attend the arbitration was set aside for lacking statutory basis. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, quashed the interim orders, and confirmed that the parties must proceed in accordance with the arbitration order dated 22.03.2024, thereby affirming the finality of the arbitral appointment and precluding further judicial interference.
The SC held that once a sole arbitrator is appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court ceases to have jurisdiction to entertain further applications related to the arbitration proceedings, including prayers for non-signatories to intervene or remain present. The applications by non-signatories seeking such permission were deemed misconceived and an abuse of process, as the Act does not provide for observers or intervention by non-parties in arbitration. The impugned order permitting non-signatories to attend the arbitration was set aside for lacking statutory basis. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, quashed the interim orders, and confirmed that the parties must proceed in accordance with the arbitration order dated 22.03.2024, thereby affirming the finality of the arbitral appointment and precluding further judicial interference.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.