Twin Conditions U/S 127 Of Income Tax Act For Transferring Assessee's Case From One Officer To Another Are Mandatory: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has elucidated the mandatory twin conditions for transfer of an assessee's case under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, from one Assessing Officer to another. Section 127 stipulates that the Commissioner may, after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter and after recording his reasons for doing so, transfer any case from Assessing Officer subordinate to him to any other Assessing Officer also subordinate to him. ...

High Court Which Appointed Arbitrator U/S 11(6) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Classified As “Court” U/S 42: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal High Court bench of Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua has held that the High Court which exercises original civil jurisdiction cannot be classified as 'Court' for the purpose of Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act when it merely appointed arbitrators under Section 11(6) of the Act. Section 42 of the Act will not be attracted where High Court having original civil jurisdiction has only appointed the arbitrator and has not undertaken any other exercise. Brief Facts...

Award Passed On Consent Cannot Be Held To Be Patently Illegal Or Contrary To Public Policy: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justices Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Satyen Vaidya held that the award being primarily based on consent cannot also be held to be patently illegal or in conflict with the public policy of India. Brief Facts The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the “Act”), assailing the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 06.07.2023 in Arbitration Case No.69...

Court Not Having Jurisdiction To Entertain Application U/S 34 Cannot Go Into Merits Of Award: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua has held that once the court comes to the conclusion that it didn't have jurisdiction to entertain the application under section 34 of the Arbitration Act, it cannot go into the merits of the case. This appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration Act arose out of an order passed by the District Judge by which objections preferred under section 34 of the Arbitration Act against the award were rejected. The district...

Award Suffers From Patent Illegality When Adjudication Is Done Without Giving Any Reasons: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Satyen Vaidya, while a Section 34 petition, has held that when an award has been found to be rendered without giving any reasoning regarding the adjudication of the disputes, the said award suffers from patent illegality apparent on the face of the award, and liable to be set aside. Facts: The petitioner was awarded a contract to carry out certain construction activities on Chilladhar-Bihar road and Jibhi-Bahu road by Respondent No. 2...

Petition Filed After Expiry Of Limitation Period U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained Unless Sufficient Cause Is Shown: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua has held that petition under section 34 of the Arbitration Act cannot be entertained which is filed beyond the prescribed period of 3 months under section 34(3) of the Act in the absence of sufficient cause being shown. Brief Facts Award was passed on 06.11.2023 in favour of the non-applicant/respondent by the learned Sole Arbitrator. The State of Himachal Pradesh, feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid award, has...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Reiterates Limited Scope Of Court Intervention U/S 34 & 37 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Virender Singh has reiterated that the scope of interference with arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is narrow and not akin to appellate jurisdiction. Courts may only interfere if the award exhibits patent illegality or arbitrariness that goes to the root of the matter.Brief Facts:The Government of India, by a notification under Section 3(A) of the National Highways Act, 1956, acquired land in...

While Hearing Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act, Court Must Confine Itself To Grounds U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua affirmed that supervisory role of Courts is very restricted in dealing with appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act. Scope of interference in a petition under Section 34 of the Act is very narrow. Jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Act is narrower.Therefore, Courts must be very conservative while dealing with arbitral awards and confine themselves to the grounds strictly available under Section 34 of the Act.Brief...

Deposit Of Awarded Amount In Court Registry Sufficient To Extinguish Liability Arising Under Award: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi has held that the deposit of awarded amount in pursuance of an order of the court into the court registry would be equivalent to payment under section 31 of the Arbitration Act. This will extinguish the liability arising under the award for which execution petition would then not be maintainable. Brief Facts The present petition has been filed laying challenge to the impugned judgment dated 23.08.2019, whereby...

Punjab Roadways Cannot Deprive Himachal Pradesh Govt Of Passenger Tax, Interest On Delayed Payment When Its Buses Are Plying On Territory: HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court recently directed the Punjab Roadways to clear the interest due upon it for delayed payment of passenger tax and surcharge to the HP government. A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Satyen Vaidya observed that the body first failed to deposit any tax with the authorities of Himachal Pradesh despite the fact that it had been running its buses within its territory, and then disputed liability of interest. “Thus, in...

Award Cannot Be Set Aside On Grounds Of Mere Illegality Unless Patent Illegality Is Established U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, affirmed that 'patent illegality' in the award calls for interference under section 34 of the Arbitration Act but a mere illegality is not patent illegality. It ought to be apparent on the face of the award and not the one which is culled out by way of a long drawn analysis of pleadings and evidence. Brief Facts The National Highway Authority of India (for short 'NHAI') feeling aggrieved against the dismissal of...

Himachal Pradesh HC Upholds Levy Of GST On Mining Royalty Payable Under Mining Concession Granted By State

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging notifications issued by the Central government for levy of GST on Royalty paid by a Mineral Concession Holder for mining concession granted by the State. The Petitioner, a firm engaged in stone crushing, was issued notices and summons under Section 70 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, demanding GST on royalty. Petitioner's challenge in the year 2023 was based on a seven-Judge Bench decision of the Supreme...