https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41859 An arbitration clause did not cover the fundamental question whether excise duty was payable on the goods supplied, because that issue was treated as a substantive question of law requiring adjudication by a competent court and involved the Central Government as a necessary party. The defendant-company was only a pro forma party on that controversy, so the suit could not be stayed under the arbitration clause. The stay application under the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 was therefore unwarranted, and the dispute was held not referable to arbitration for the purpose of stalling the suit. en-us Mon, 08 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:48:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41859 An arbitration clause did not cover the fundamental question whether excise duty was payable on the goods supplied, because that issue was treated as a substantive question of law requiring adjudication by a competent court and involved the Central Government as a necessary party. The defendant-company was only a pro forma party on that controversy, so the suit could not be stayed under the arbitration clause. The stay application under the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 was therefore unwarranted, and the dispute was held not referable to arbitration for the purpose of stalling the suit. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41859