https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470420 An arbitrator's broad de novo authority to review and revise the Commissioner's decisions permits adjudication of claims whose quantum differs from that presented before the Commissioner, where the arbitration clause does not restrict the reference to prior evidence or arguments. However, although the Evidence Act's technical rules do not strictly govern arbitration, natural justice requires a fair opportunity to challenge contested documentary evidence. Receiving unproved documents over objection without enabling effective examination of their makers may constitute legal misconduct, even in a non-speaking award. The article states that this procedural defect requires fresh determination of the affected claims by the arbitrator. en-us Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Jul 2026 17:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470420 An arbitrator's broad de novo authority to review and revise the Commissioner's decisions permits adjudication of claims whose quantum differs from that presented before the Commissioner, where the arbitration clause does not restrict the reference to prior evidence or arguments. However, although the Evidence Act's technical rules do not strictly govern arbitration, natural justice requires a fair opportunity to challenge contested documentary evidence. Receiving unproved documents over objection without enabling effective examination of their makers may constitute legal misconduct, even in a non-speaking award. The article states that this procedural defect requires fresh determination of the affected claims by the arbitrator. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470420