https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796451 Article 226 jurisdiction is ordinarily unavailable to recover a differential tax amount withheld under a private construction contract where the agreement contains an arbitration mechanism. The contractual payment dispute, including entitlement to the deducted amount, must be pursued before the arbitrator when arbitration has been invoked. The note states that a writ remedy cannot be used as a public-law route for contractual monetary recovery where an effective arbitral remedy is available, and it does not address the merits of entitlement to the differential tax amount. en-us Wed, 29 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Aug 2026 09:11:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796451 Article 226 jurisdiction is ordinarily unavailable to recover a differential tax amount withheld under a private construction contract where the agreement contains an arbitration mechanism. The contractual payment dispute, including entitlement to the deducted amount, must be pursued before the arbitrator when arbitration has been invoked. The note states that a writ remedy cannot be used as a public-law route for contractual monetary recovery where an effective arbitral remedy is available, and it does not address the merits of entitlement to the differential tax amount. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Wed, 29 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796451