https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174102 In a Section 34 challenge, the Court reiterated that interference with an arbitral award is limited and that it cannot reappraise the contract as if on appeal. The award directing reimbursement of service tax on road maintenance work was sustained because Condition 13.3 was read as covering only duties and taxes payable under the law existing at the time of bidding, not a levy imposed later during the contract. As no contractual term clearly shifted the subsequently imposed tax burden to the contractor, the arbitrator's view that reimbursement was payable was held to be a reasonable and plausible interpretation of the contract. The challenge therefore failed and the award was upheld. en-us Mon, 19 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:11:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174102 In a Section 34 challenge, the Court reiterated that interference with an arbitral award is limited and that it cannot reappraise the contract as if on appeal. The award directing reimbursement of service tax on road maintenance work was sustained because Condition 13.3 was read as covering only duties and taxes payable under the law existing at the time of bidding, not a levy imposed later during the contract. As no contractual term clearly shifted the subsequently imposed tax burden to the contractor, the arbitrator's view that reimbursement was payable was held to be a reasonable and plausible interpretation of the contract. The challenge therefore failed and the award was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 19 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174102