https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791434 A Section 34 challenge to an arbitral award was treated as within limitation because the reimbursement claim arose when the additional tax burden crossed the contractual threshold, and the related dispute process was pursued in sequence. The award was then found vulnerable because it rested on no evidence of actual enhanced-tax payment, no proof of compliance with the contractual threshold and deduction mechanism, and no proper substantiation for later financial years. It also failed to deal with the material defence and relevant notifications, so the court regarded it as unsupported by reasons and marked by patent illegality and perversity. The award was set aside. en-us Wed, 06 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 May 2026 08:50:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791434 A Section 34 challenge to an arbitral award was treated as within limitation because the reimbursement claim arose when the additional tax burden crossed the contractual threshold, and the related dispute process was pursued in sequence. The award was then found vulnerable because it rested on no evidence of actual enhanced-tax payment, no proof of compliance with the contractual threshold and deduction mechanism, and no proper substantiation for later financial years. It also failed to deal with the material defence and relevant notifications, so the court regarded it as unsupported by reasons and marked by patent illegality and perversity. The award was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791434