Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 OCTOBER 2020

Dispute Resolution And Arbitration –October 2020

HSA Advocates
Explore more from HSA Advocates

On February 28, 2006, the Oil and Natural Gas Company awarded a contract to a consortium comprising of a South-Korean company (the Respondent/Assessee) and Larsen & Toubro Ltd. for carrying out the work of surveys, ...

IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Faranaaz Karbhari
Faranaaz Karbhari
Pragya Ohri
Pragya Ohri
Kshitiz Khera
Kshitiz Khera
Rahul Jain
Rahul Jain
Ishwar Ahuja
Ishwar Ahuja
Kanika Kumar
Kanika Kumar
Aditi Soni
Aditi Soni
Khushboo Rupani
Khushboo Rupani
Mahafrin Mehta
Mahafrin Mehta
Author LinkedIn connections

DIT (International Tax) v. Samsung Heavy Industries Pvt Ltd

CA No. 12183 of 2016

Background facts

  • On February 28, 2006, the Oil and Natural Gas Company (ONGC) awarded a contract to a consortium comprising of a South-Korean company (the Respondent/Assessee) and Larsen & Toubro Ltd. for carrying out the work of surveys, design, engineering, procurement, fabrication, installation and modification at existing facilities, and start-up and commissioning of entire facilities covered under the 'Vasai East Development Project' (Project)
  • Thereafter, on May 24, 2006, the Respondent set up a Project Office in Mumbai (PO), which was supposed to act as a communication channel between the consortium and ONGC. The work commenced in the same year and was slated to be completed by July 26, 2009.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Section 138 Of The Negotiable Instruments Act: What The Supreme Court’s New Procedural Guidelines Mean For Cheque-Bounce Cases

A cheque is supposed to offer something close to certainty in a commercial transaction. When a cheque is issued, the recipient ordinarily expects that it will be honoured when presented. A dishonoured cheque, therefore, is not merely a failed payment; it can have wider consequences for the credibility and discipline of commercial dealings.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Article

From Permission To Approval: Decoding The Maharashtra Land Revenue Code Amendment 2026

The Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2026 (L. A. BILL No. XXVIII OF 2026) represents a significant reform in the regulation of government land transactions in Maharashtra. Introduced in the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly on 24th March 2026, it focuses primarily on amending Section 37A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, a provision that governs the sale, transfer, redevelopment, use of additional Floor Space Index (“FSI”), transfer of Transferable Development Rights (“TDR”), and change in use of government land.
IndiaGovernment, Public Sector
HSA Advocates
HSA Advocates
Article

Major Reform In Maharashtra: Sanad Requirement Removed For Land Conversion

The Government of Maharashtra has taken a significant step towards enhancing ease of doing business by rationalising the framework governing agricultural land conversion. As per the recent amendment to the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (MLRC), notified on 31 December 2025, and the Government Resolution dated 10 February 2026, the requirement of obtaining a separate sanad or non-agricultural permission from the Collector has been abolished for permissible non-agricultural uses under the Development Plan or Regional Plan under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP).
IndiaReal Estate and Construction
HSA Advocates
HSA Advocates
Article

More Than A Signature: Supreme Court Clarifies When Non-Signatories Can Be Bound By Arbitration

The Supreme Court, in KKH Finvest Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Ashiesh Shukla & Ors., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1498, has reaffirmed an important principle governing the reference of disputes involving non-signatories to arbitration. The Hon’ble Court held that the absence of a signature on an arbitration agreement is not, by itself, determinative of whether a person can be bound by the arbitration agreement.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
HSA Advocates
HSA Advocates