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 allowed the petition and quashed and set aside the impugned arbitral award dated 21.08.2024. The court held the Presiding Arbitrator was de jure ineligible for appointment for failure to make the disclosure required by Section 12(1) of the A&C Act, 1996, and that the Arbitral Tribunal erred in dismissing the petitioner's Section 12 challenge to the appointment. Relying on the distinction between non-waivable disqualification and situations giving rise to doubts about impartiality, the HC found the omission fatal to the arbitrator's appointment and remedial waiver inapplicable, thereby allowing and disposing of the petition in favour of the petitioner.
HC allowed the petition and quashed and set aside the impugned arbitral award dated 21.08.2024. The court held the Presiding Arbitrator was de jure ineligible for appointment for failure to make the disclosure required by Section 12(1) of the A&C Act, 1996, and that the Arbitral Tribunal erred in dismissing the petitioner's Section 12 challenge to the appointment. Relying on the distinction between non-waivable disqualification and situations giving rise to doubts about impartiality, the HC found the omission fatal to the arbitrator's appointment and remedial waiver inapplicable, thereby allowing and disposing of the petition in favour of the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.