<?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>2023 (4) TMI 1371 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458785</link>
    <description>A voluntarily executed power purchase agreement under the renewable energy certificate framework could not be retrospectively rewritten by a later regulatory amendment unless the amendment clearly overrode pre-existing contracts, so the original fixed tariff was restored. Prior approval of the State Commission was not required because the applicable regulatory scheme contained no express mandate for such approval and the agreement did not conflict with the approved model framework. Allegations of coercion, duress, or unequal bargaining power failed because they lacked specific pleadings and supporting material; commercial sophistication and a negotiated arrangement were inconsistent with those claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2024 15:39:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=777953" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 1371 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458785</link>
      <description>A voluntarily executed power purchase agreement under the renewable energy certificate framework could not be retrospectively rewritten by a later regulatory amendment unless the amendment clearly overrode pre-existing contracts, so the original fixed tariff was restored. Prior approval of the State Commission was not required because the applicable regulatory scheme contained no express mandate for such approval and the agreement did not conflict with the approved model framework. Allegations of coercion, duress, or unequal bargaining power failed because they lacked specific pleadings and supporting material; commercial sophistication and a negotiated arrangement were inconsistent with those claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458785</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>