https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268478 Section 86(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003 empowered the State Commission to adjudicate the dispute despite an arbitration clause, and the contractual foreign arbitration arrangement did not oust that jurisdiction. FIFO appropriation of the appellant's part-payments was upheld under the law of appropriation of payments, and the challenge on limitation or delay and laches failed. Rebate under the PPA was denied because it depended on full invoice payment within the stipulated time, which part-payment did not satisfy. Interest on overdue payments was sustained because the PPA expressly provided compensation for delayed payment. The concurrent findings were affirmed and the appeal failed. en-us Fri, 04 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Nov 2015 23:11:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268478 Section 86(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003 empowered the State Commission to adjudicate the dispute despite an arbitration clause, and the contractual foreign arbitration arrangement did not oust that jurisdiction. FIFO appropriation of the appellant's part-payments was upheld under the law of appropriation of payments, and the challenge on limitation or delay and laches failed. Rebate under the PPA was denied because it depended on full invoice payment within the stipulated time, which part-payment did not satisfy. Interest on overdue payments was sustained because the PPA expressly provided compensation for delayed payment. The concurrent findings were affirmed and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268478