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 held that the disputes constitute an "international commercial arbitration" under Section 2(1)(f) of the 1996 Act, with the seat in Benin, thereby attracting Part II and excluding recourse to Section 11 in Part I. Since the parties had contractually agreed to arbitration in Benin under the principal BSA, the Section 11(6) petition for appointment of a sole arbitrator in India was declared misconceived and contrary to party autonomy. SC further held that findings of the Delhi HC under Section 45 on the operative contractual matrix and the validity of the Benin arbitration clause operate as issue estoppel between the same parties. Invocation of the group of companies doctrine was rejected as unsupported by evidence of mutual intention. The arbitration petition was dismissed.
SC held that the disputes constitute an "international commercial arbitration" under Section 2(1)(f) of the 1996 Act, with the seat in Benin, thereby attracting Part II and excluding recourse to Section 11 in Part I. Since the parties had contractually agreed to arbitration in Benin under the principal BSA, the Section 11(6) petition for appointment of a sole arbitrator in India was declared misconceived and contrary to party autonomy. SC further held that findings of the Delhi HC under Section 45 on the operative contractual matrix and the validity of the Benin arbitration clause operate as issue estoppel between the same parties. Invocation of the group of companies doctrine was rejected as unsupported by evidence of mutual intention. The arbitration petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.