https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251431 The Court found no grounds to invalidate the award due to delay or bias, as the delay did not vitiate the detailed and reasoned award. Regarding the interpretation of Service Tax liability, the Court upheld the Arbitrator's decision that the petitioner was liable based on the lease deed's Clause 7.1 encompassing "other outgoings," including Service Tax. The Court distinguished previous cases and emphasized the contract terms in determining tax liability. The petition was dismissed, with the petitioner ordered to pay Rs. 5,000 in costs to the respondent within four weeks, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. en-us Wed, 04 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Sep 2014 13:07:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251431 The Court found no grounds to invalidate the award due to delay or bias, as the delay did not vitiate the detailed and reasoned award. Regarding the interpretation of Service Tax liability, the Court upheld the Arbitrator's decision that the petitioner was liable based on the lease deed's Clause 7.1 encompassing "other outgoings," including Service Tax. The Court distinguished previous cases and emphasized the contract terms in determining tax liability. The petition was dismissed, with the petitioner ordered to pay Rs. 5,000 in costs to the respondent within four weeks, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251431