https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80694 Arbitration award challenged u/s 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Arbitrator allowed 3% of contract amount as on-site establishment expenses using Hudson's formula. High Court erred in setting aside award on grounds of non-payment of bills and lack of discussion on interest claim. Supreme Court held High Court's reasoning insufficient for interference u/s 37, restoring award. Pre-reference interest governed by substantive law, not solely Section 31(7)(a). Contract did not prohibit pre-reference interest, so High Court's interference unwarranted. Appeal disposed of, award upheld. en-us Tue, 27 Aug 2024 08:16:57 +0530 Tue, 27 Aug 2024 08:16:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80694 Arbitration award challenged u/s 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Arbitrator allowed 3% of contract amount as on-site establishment expenses using Hudson's formula. High Court erred in setting aside award on grounds of non-payment of bills and lack of discussion on interest claim. Supreme Court held High Court's reasoning insufficient for interference u/s 37, restoring award. Pre-reference interest governed by substantive law, not solely Section 31(7)(a). Contract did not prohibit pre-reference interest, so High Court's interference unwarranted. Appeal disposed of, award upheld. Highlights Indian Laws Tue, 27 Aug 2024 08:16:57 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80694