1999 (11) TMI 799

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eme Court. The arbitration proceedings have arisen out of a claim made by the respondent for reimbursement of the cess collected by the State Government under the Orissa Cess Act, 1962. 2. The case of the respondent before the Arbitral Tribunal, comprising Justice S. Ranganathan, Justice D.R. Khanna and Justice H.L. Aggarwal as arbitrators was that the cess amounts paid by it were reimbursable by the petitioner, the levy having been validated under the Cess and other Taxes on Minerals (Validation) Act, 1992. 3. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Dr. A.M. Singhvi, has submitted before me that the Apex Court in India Cements Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 1990 SC 88 and Orissa Cements Ltd. v . State of Orissa AIR 1991 SC 1676 h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nly after the decision of the larger Bench holding the cess to be legally leviable. 5. The learned counsel for the respondents questions the maintainability of this petition on the ground that a similar prayer had been made before the arbitrators and the same had been declined. In other words, what is submitted is that petitioner having chosen to seek his remedy under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and having failed there, cannot now come in a petition under section 9 of the Act, seeking protection in the nature of stay of proceedings. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the substance of his request before the arbitrators was for an adjournment and not for interim protection, as contemplated within section 17 ....