Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
A bill of lading clause stating that disputes can be settled by arbitration was held not to create a binding arbitration agreement. At the stage of appointing an arbitrator, the Court confined itself to the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and read the clause in its contractual context. The word "can" was treated as permissive, indicating only a possible mode of settlement rather than a mandatory obligation to arbitrate. Applying the principles in K.K. Modi and Jagdish Chander, the Court found that the clause required further consent when a dispute arose and therefore lacked the definitiveness needed to compel arbitration. The refusal to appoint an arbitrator was upheld.
A bill of lading clause stating that disputes can be settled by arbitration was held not to create a binding arbitration agreement. At the stage of appointing an arbitrator, the Court confined itself to the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and read the clause in its contractual context. The word "can" was treated as permissive, indicating only a possible mode of settlement rather than a mandatory obligation to arbitrate. Applying the principles in K.K. Modi and Jagdish Chander, the Court found that the clause required further consent when a dispute arose and therefore lacked the definitiveness needed to compel arbitration. The refusal to appoint an arbitrator was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
