https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788685 Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an arbitral award can be interfered with only on limited grounds such as patent illegality, perversity or conflict with the public policy of India, and the court will not reappreciate evidence as an appellate forum. Applying that standard, the Delhi HC upheld the award because the Majority Arbitral Tribunal had plausibly found that the petitioner had not taken steps to avail input tax credit, including by approaching the relevant authorities, and had also relied on the respondent's documents and reimbursement of CENVAT and VAT amounts. The challenge was therefore treated as an impermissible attempt to revisit factual findings, and no ground for interference was made out. en-us Mon, 23 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Mar 2026 08:52:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788685 Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an arbitral award can be interfered with only on limited grounds such as patent illegality, perversity or conflict with the public policy of India, and the court will not reappreciate evidence as an appellate forum. Applying that standard, the Delhi HC upheld the award because the Majority Arbitral Tribunal had plausibly found that the petitioner had not taken steps to avail input tax credit, including by approaching the relevant authorities, and had also relied on the respondent's documents and reimbursement of CENVAT and VAT amounts. The challenge was therefore treated as an impermissible attempt to revisit factual findings, and no ground for interference was made out. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 23 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788685