Arbitration Clause In Tax Invoice Binding If Goods Accepted Without Protest: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 6 May held that an arbitration clause contained in the terms and conditions of a tax invoice constitutes a valid arbitration agreement when the receiving party accepts the goods supplied under the invoice without objection. Justice Piyush Agrawal appointed former judge Justice Vivek Kumar Birla as the sole arbitrator in a dispute between Ganesha Ecosphere Limited and Goodcore Spintex Pvt. Limited after holding that the parties were bound by the arbitration clause...

Revenue Must Rebut Taxpayer's Claimed Date Of GST Order Communication With Cogent Evidence: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has reiterated that where a taxpayer discloses the actual date of communication of an order under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the burden shifts to the Revenue to rebut that assertion with cogent material. It further held that the appellate authority is bound to give an independent finding on the date of communication of the order. Referring to the decisions of the division bench of the Allahabad High Court in Bambino Agro Industries Limited v....

Allahabad High Court Rejects Civil Court Relief In Covid Loan Diversion Case, Upholds SARFAESI Action

On 11 May, the Allahabad High Court dismissed an appeal seeking to restrain SARFAESI recovery proceedings against Srijan Hospital, holding that civil courts cannot interfere where a borrower breaches loan conditions by diverting funds and statutory remedies under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 are available. A Bench of Justice Abdul Shahid held: “The appellant/plaintiff has materially changed the purpose of the aforesaid loan. He had entered into an agreement with the respondent-bank under the LGSCAS...

No Rectification For Debatable Points Under Section 254(2) Of Income Tax Act: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 6 May held that only mistakes apparent from the record can be rectified under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and that debatable issues fall outside its scope. A Division Bench of Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary dismissed the appeal filed by Abusaad Ahmad, upholding the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's refusal to rectify its earlier order rejecting condonation of delay. It held: “In order to attract the power to rectify under...

Allahabad High Court Allows Writ Petition Against Arbitral Award Passed After Unilateral Shift Of Seat

The Allahabad High Court on 5 May held that a writ petition challenging an ex parte arbitral award is maintainable in exceptional circumstances involving lack of jurisdiction or violation of principles of natural justice. A Division Bench of Justices Ajit Kumar and Indrajeet Shukla allowed the writ petition filed by Sushil Kumar Prajapati the proprietor of Laxmi Medical Agency against the Central Hospital, North Central Railway, Allahabad, and set aside an ex parte arbitral award passed in...

Allahabad High Court Refuses Writ Against MSME Council Award, Directs Recourse Under Section 34

The Allahabad High Court on 30 April reiterated that a writ petition challenging an ex-parte award passed by the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council under Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 is not maintainable when the statute provides an alternative remedy under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. A Division Bench of Justices Saral Srivastava and Garima Prashad dismissed the writ petition filed by Shri Krishna...

Dealer's Counter-Offer Not Consent: Allahabad HC Sets Aside HPCL Arbitrator Appointment

The Allahabad High Court has set aside an arbitral award after finding that Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. could not validly appoint its own officer as arbitrator without a clear written waiver from the dealer after the dispute had arisen. "Hence, the appellant cannot be non-suited for not taking a precise ground in its petition under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 as the ground of illegibility could be raised at any stage and having done so and examined by this Court, it is found that the...

Arbitral Tribunal Can Decide Limitation Even After Appointment Under Section 11: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 27 April held that even where a Court appoints an Arbitral Tribunal under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 without examining limitation, the Arbitral Tribunal can still decide such objections under Section 16. A Bench of Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Abdesh Kumar Chaudhary held that Arbitral Tribunals retain full authority to decide their own jurisdiction, including limitation, even after a Section 11 reference, and set aside the Tribunal's...

Public Announcement Under IBC Sufficient, Individual Notice Not Required: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 24 April, held that under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, individual notice to each creditor is not required and that a public announcement under Section 15 of the Code constitutes sufficient notice to corporate creditors. A Bench comprising Justices Ajit Kumar and Swarupama Chaturvedi, while allowing a petition by South East U.P. Power Transmission Company Limited (and a connected petition by Tata Steel Limited) further held that creditors must exercise...

IBC Overrides Electricity Act In Conflict, Pre-CIRP Dues Cannot Be Enforced: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 24 April, held that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), being a later law, prevails over the Electricity Act, 2003 in case of inconsistency. The Bench of Justices Ajit Kumar and Swarupama Chaturvedi allowed the writ petition and held that Section 238 of the IBC gives the Code overriding effect over other statutes, including sector-specific laws. It held: “The legislative intent is thus to create a self-contained and comprehensive framework where all...

Arbitral Award Executable Against SPV Members Not Party To Proceedings: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 9 April held that members of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) fall within the expression “persons claiming under them” under Section 35 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and allowed arbitral awards to be executed against them even if they were not parties to the arbitration proceedings. Justice Pankaj Bhatia delivered the ruling while dismissing petitions challenging execution proceedings initiated by Adani Enterprises Ltd. against shareholders of an SPV...

Allahabad HC Flooded With Pleas Seeking Expeditious Disposal Of Section 14 SARFAESI Matters, Directs UP Govt To Issue Instructions

Observing a “flood” of petitions over delays in processing applications for assistance in taking possession of secured assets and non-compliance with earlier directions, the Allahabad High Court has cautioned that such inaction defeats the purpose of the SARFAESI Act. “Recently we have seen a flood of writ petitions before this Court in which the secured creditor or auction purchaser comes for the expeditious disposal of the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and further in...