Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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 
