Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
SC allowed the appeals filed by the Appellant, set aside the arbitral award dated 27.04.2022 (corrected 26.07.2022) and quashed the judgments/orders of the high court, and dismissed the appeals by the Respondents. The Court held the arbitrator exceeded jurisdiction by effectively rewriting contract terms and applying a post-hoc policy, rendering the award patently illegal and in conflict with public policy. The award was set aside under s.34(2A) and s.34(2)(b)(ii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the errors constituting a breach of fundamental principles of justice that could not be cured by merits review.
SC allowed the appeals filed by the Appellant, set aside the arbitral award dated 27.04.2022 (corrected 26.07.2022) and quashed the judgments/orders of the high court, and dismissed the appeals by the Respondents. The Court held the arbitrator exceeded jurisdiction by effectively rewriting contract terms and applying a post-hoc policy, rendering the award patently illegal and in conflict with public policy. The award was set aside under s.34(2A) and s.34(2)(b)(ii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the errors constituting a breach of fundamental principles of justice that could not be cured by merits review.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
