https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760380 A commercial dispute over who bore excise-duty liability arising from goods classification was held arbitrable because it concerned only inter se contractual rights, not any liability owed to the revenue authorities. The tax-adjustment clause was construed broadly to cover not only changes in tax rates but also classification-based differential excise duty, so the purchaser's failure to issue revised purchase orders did not defeat the claim. In Section 34 review, the tribunal's use of classification material was treated as contract interpretation rather than a declaration in rem, and no perversity, jurisdictional error, or manifestly unreasonable construction was shown. The arbitral award was therefore sustained. en-us Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Oct 2024 08:13:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760380 A commercial dispute over who bore excise-duty liability arising from goods classification was held arbitrable because it concerned only inter se contractual rights, not any liability owed to the revenue authorities. The tax-adjustment clause was construed broadly to cover not only changes in tax rates but also classification-based differential excise duty, so the purchaser's failure to issue revised purchase orders did not defeat the claim. In Section 34 review, the tribunal's use of classification material was treated as contract interpretation rather than a declaration in rem, and no perversity, jurisdictional error, or manifestly unreasonable construction was shown. The arbitral award was therefore sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760380