The article examines the Supreme Court's reasoning in J&K Economic Reconstruction Agency v. Rash Builders India Pvt. Ltd. concerning the determination of an arbitral seat in the absence of an express agreement. It critically analyses the Supreme Court's reliance on the closest and intimate connection test and the Shashoua principle, arguing that the two tests are structurally inconsistent and that their sequencing may undermine the primacy accorded to party intention.