<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (9) TMI 1030 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198611</link>
    <description>An arbitral award must contain reasons that disclose the tribunal&#039;s thought process linking the material to the conclusion reached; mere reference to pleadings, documents, or submissions is insufficient. The requirement under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is mandatory unless the parties agree otherwise or a statutory exception applies. Where reasons are absent, the court may first remit the matter to the tribunal to furnish reasons under the remand provision before deciding whether the award should be set aside. On the stated record, the award was deficient for lack of reasons on certain claims, and the objections were required to be reheard after remittal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2018 18:03:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=507708" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 1030 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198611</link>
      <description>An arbitral award must contain reasons that disclose the tribunal&#039;s thought process linking the material to the conclusion reached; mere reference to pleadings, documents, or submissions is insufficient. The requirement under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is mandatory unless the parties agree otherwise or a statutory exception applies. Where reasons are absent, the court may first remit the matter to the tribunal to furnish reasons under the remand provision before deciding whether the award should be set aside. On the stated record, the award was deficient for lack of reasons on certain claims, and the objections were required to be reheard after remittal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198611</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>