<?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 (11) TMI 1440 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468030</link>
    <description>A commercial power purchase agreement must be construed according to its plain terms as a whole: where LNG, natural gas and RLNG are treated as primary fuels, a consent requirement tied to liquid fuel arrangements cannot be implied into the RLNG arrangement. The agreement&#039;s separate commercial-implication clause does not override the clause governing declared capacity, and fixed capacity charges remain payable on declared capacity irrespective of actual scheduling or off-take. The contract&#039;s structure and commercial purpose support preserving generating-station viability during gas shortage, so the appellant remained liable for capacity charges.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 11:24:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=896676" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 1440 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468030</link>
      <description>A commercial power purchase agreement must be construed according to its plain terms as a whole: where LNG, natural gas and RLNG are treated as primary fuels, a consent requirement tied to liquid fuel arrangements cannot be implied into the RLNG arrangement. The agreement&#039;s separate commercial-implication clause does not override the clause governing declared capacity, and fixed capacity charges remain payable on declared capacity irrespective of actual scheduling or off-take. The contract&#039;s structure and commercial purpose support preserving generating-station viability during gas shortage, so the appellant remained liable for capacity charges.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468030</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>