P.R. Shah, Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. B.H.H. Securities (P) Ltd.

1 SCC 594Reported decision2012#14663 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2018.

Judgments citing P.R. Shah, Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. B.H.H. Securities (P) Ltd.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -3 vs. A.R. LEASING PVT. LTD

ITA/430/2018HC Delhi11 Apr 2018

Bench: The Sole Arbitrator Seeking Supply Of Complete Set Of The Proceedings Wherein The Respondent No.3 In Paragraph 4 States As Under: “4. That Now, The Applicant/Respondent No. 3 Is Not The Director Of The Respondent No. 1 Co. & Is Only A Guarantor In The Instant Case.”

Section 12Section 34

…n mind when awards of lay arbitrators are challenged.] . Once it is found that the arbitrators approach is not arbitrary or capricious, then he is the last word on facts. In P.R. Shah, Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. B.H.H. Securities (P) Ltd. [(2012) 1 SCC 594 : (2012) 1 SCC (Civ) 342] , this Court held: (SCC pp. 601-02, para 21) “21. A court does not sit in appeal over the award of an Arbitral Tribunal by reassessing or reappreciating the evidence. An award can be challenged only under the grounds mentioned in Section 34(2) of the Act. The Arbitral Tribunal has examined the facts and held that…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, NEW DELHI vs. DHARA VEGETABLE OIL & FOODS CO. LTD.(NOW MERGED WITH MOTHER DAIRY FRUIT & VEGETABLE LTD.)

ITA/71/2018HC Delhi23 Jan 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 34

…in mind when awards of lay arbitrators are challenged.] . Once it is found that the arbitrators approach is not arbitrary or capricious, then he is the last word on facts. In P.R. Shah, Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. B.H.H. Securities (P) Ltd. [(2012) 1 SCC 594 : (2012) 1 SCC (Civ) 342] , this Court held: (SCC pp. 601-02, para 21) “21. A court does not sit in appeal over the award of an Arbitral Tribunal by reassessing or reappreciating the evidence. An award can be challenged only under the grounds mentioned in Section 34(2) of the Act. The Arbitral Tribunal has examined the facts and held that bot…

BOSTON SCIENTIFIC INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/321/2017HC Delhi24 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 29(1)Section 29ASection 29A(4)Section 31(2)Section 31(5)Section 33(1)(a)Section 34Section 36

…O.M.P. (COMM.) 321/2017 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. (COMM.) 321/2017 Reserved on: 28th May, 2018 Date of decision : 28th August, 2018 M/S. CHANDOK MACHINERIES ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Avi Singh, Mr.Shashank Dixit, Mr.Katyayini & Ms.Purnima Malik, Advs. versus M/S. S. N. SUNDERSON & CO ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Jayant K. Mehta, Mr.Pulkit Agarwal & Mr.Shubhankar, Advs. CORAM: HON'…

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-02 vs. M/S C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD.

ITA/557/2016HC Delhi27 Sept 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

For Respondent: Ms Kiran Suri, Senior Advocate with
Section 34

…n 34 of the Act would not examine the sufficiency of material or re- appreciate the evidence considered by the Arbitral Tribunal. The Supreme Court in P.R. Shah, Shares and Stock Brokers Private Limited v. B.H.H. Securities Private Limited And Others : (2012) 1 SCC 594 had stated the above principle in the following words. "21. A court does not sit in appeal over the award of an Arbitral Tribunal by reassessing or reappreciating the evidence. An award can be challenged only under the grounds mentioned in Section 34(2) of the Act. The Arbitral Tribunal has examined the facts and held that both the second Responden…

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E) vs. INSTITUTE OF MARKETING & MANAGEMENT

ITA/545/2016HC Delhi21 Sept 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 34

…in mind when awards of lay arbitrators are challenged.] . Once it is found that the arbitrators approach is not arbitrary or capricious, then he is the last word on facts. In P.R. Shah, Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. B.H.H. Securities (P) Ltd. [(2012) 1 SCC 594 : (2012) 1 SCC (Civ) 342] , this Court held: (SCC pp. 601-02, para 21) “21. A court does not sit in appeal over the award of an Arbitral Tribunal by reassessing or reappreciating the evidence. An award can be challenged only under the grounds mentioned in Section 34(2) of the Act. The Arbitral Tribunal has examined the facts and held that b…

M/s. PLL-Suncon Joint Venture vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/373/2011HC Telangana29 Nov 2011
Section 34

…o a trained legal mind would not be held to be invalid on this score[1]. Once it is found that the arbitrators approach is not arbitrary or capricious, then he is the last word on facts. In P.R. Shah, Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd v BHH Securities (2012) 1 SCC 594, this Court held: "21. A court does not sit in appeal over the award of an Arbitral Tribunal by reassessing or reappreciating the evidence. An award can be challenged only under the grounds mentioned in Section 34 (2) of the Act. The Arbitral Tribunal has examined the facts and held that both the second respondent and the appellant are lia…

P.R. Shah, Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. B.H.H. Securities (P) Ltd. (1 SCC 594) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax