<?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>2024 (7) TMI 989 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755769</link>
    <description>Section 36(3) permits an unconditional stay of an arbitral award only where a prima facie case shows that the arbitration agreement or the making of the award was induced or effected by fraud or corruption; on the materials considered, no such prima facie case was established, so unconditional stay was refused. The award was also construed as arising from contractual financial incentives under the share purchase agreement and Schedule 5, including a change-in-law clause, rather than as a simple refund of tax barred by the GST regime. The contractual character of the claim therefore remained intact on the record, although security of the awarded amount was directed and stay was granted upon furnishing such security.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=760612" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 989 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755769</link>
      <description>Section 36(3) permits an unconditional stay of an arbitral award only where a prima facie case shows that the arbitration agreement or the making of the award was induced or effected by fraud or corruption; on the materials considered, no such prima facie case was established, so unconditional stay was refused. The award was also construed as arising from contractual financial incentives under the share purchase agreement and Schedule 5, including a change-in-law clause, rather than as a simple refund of tax barred by the GST regime. The contractual character of the claim therefore remained intact on the record, although security of the awarded amount was directed and stay was granted upon furnishing such security.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755769</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>