https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247972 A writ petition under Article 226 was maintainable despite an arbitration clause and alternative remedy because the challenge concerned the legality of the impugned demand, not a pure contractual dispute; judicial review was therefore available against allegedly unauthorised fiscal action. On the excise issue, royalty and stowing excise duty could not be unilaterally loaded into transaction value and recovered from buyers through future contracts while the taxability question remained unresolved before a larger Bench. The recovery from future supplies was restrained, subject to the petitioners furnishing an indemnity bond to protect the respondents' position if royalty was ultimately held taxable. en-us Fri, 11 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 May 2014 12:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247972 A writ petition under Article 226 was maintainable despite an arbitration clause and alternative remedy because the challenge concerned the legality of the impugned demand, not a pure contractual dispute; judicial review was therefore available against allegedly unauthorised fiscal action. On the excise issue, royalty and stowing excise duty could not be unilaterally loaded into transaction value and recovered from buyers through future contracts while the taxability question remained unresolved before a larger Bench. The recovery from future supplies was restrained, subject to the petitioners furnishing an indemnity bond to protect the respondents' position if royalty was ultimately held taxable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247972