IRDA, Insurance , Corporate Law Articles, Notification, News and Circular

Disbursal of sums by DRT can be undertaken only with participation of Official Liquidator, who settles all claims

The plea of learned counsel for the OL that as and when the monies become available for disbursement as a result of the proceedings under the RDDB Act they should be placed at the disposal of the OL is different from the law explained by the Supreme Court in Rajasthan State Financial Corporation (supra). What [...]
Full Article

CAT had no jurisdiction to compel completion of a breached contract as that is task of Civil Court

Commission has no jurisdiction to hand over the possession of plot in question to the complainant; that is the task of the Civil Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the closest term has restrained to this Commission from assuming the power of the Civil Court. It is also clarified in the paragraph that this Court [...]
Full Article

Provisions of MRTP Act not applicable to educational institutions

There cannot be any dispute that Karanataka High Court has specifically held that the provisions of the MRTP Act were not and could not be applicable to the educational institutions. There is no dispute that the present complaint also pertains to the educational institution and its activity of imparting education. When we sec on this [...]
Full Article

Government Declares a Holiday on Sunday – April 14, 2013

It has been decided to declare Sunday, the 14th April 2013, as a Closed Holiday on account of the birthday of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, for all Central Government Offices including Industrial Establishments throughout India.
Full Article

Circular 1 of 2013 – Consolidated FDI Policy (Effective from 5-4-2013)

Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion Ministry of Commerce and Industry Government of India CONSOLIDATED FDI POLICY (EFFECTIVE FROM APRIL 5, 2013) CHAPTER 1: INTENT AND OBJECTIVE 1.1 INTENT AND OBJECTIVE 1.1.1 It is the intent and objective of the Government of India to attract and promote foreign direct investment in order to supplement domestic [...]
Full Article

Competition Act – Agreement to manufacture patented drug is not anti-competitive if other players also exist in market

The explanation to section 4 of the Act defines dominant position to mean a position of strength enjoyed by an enterprise in the relevant market in India which enables it to operate independent of competitive forces prevailing in the relevant market or affect its competitors or consumers or the relevant market in its favour. On [...]
Full Article
Tags:

S. 14 of Securitisation Act not become Unconstitutional / Harsh in Absence of appeal procedure against order of CJM/District Judge

A mere hardship cannot be a ground for striking down a valid legislation unless it is held to be suffering from the vice of discrimination or unreasonableness. A valid piece of legislation, thus, can be struck down only if it is found to be ultra vires article 14 of the Constitution of India and not [...]
Full Article

Competition Commission of India – Amendments to the Combination Regulations

The Regulations now do not require a notice to be filed for acquisition of shares or voting rights of companies if the acquisition is less than five percent of the shares or voting rights of the company in a financial year, where the acquirer already holds more than twenty five percent but less than fifty percent of the shares or voting rights of the company.
Full Article
Tags:

Definition of ‘Cluster’ to be used for dispensations under the National Manufacturing Policy – regarding

The National Manufacturing Policy was notified by Govt. of India vide Press Note No. 2 dated 4th November, 2011. Paragraph 6 of the Press Note states that while the NIMZs are an important instrumentality, the proposals contained in the Policy apply to manufacturing industry throughout the country including wherever industry is able to organize itself into 'clusters' and adopt a model of self-regulation as enunciated (copy enclosed).
Full Article

Bid rigging to reduce competition or to adversely affect or manipulate bidding process is anti-competitive

In the present case, indisputably all the participating opposite parties i.e. 28 Part-I firms and 1 Part-II firm quoted an all-inclusive rate of Rs. 66.50 each for the supply of the tendered material. Further, the quantity quoted by the each of the bidders was less than 50% of the total quantity. These facts have not [...]
Full Article
Tags:

Page 5 of 120« First...34567...102030...Last »
Copyright © TaxGuru 2011. All Rights Reserved.
About Us - Advertise - Privacy Policy - Disclaimer - Back to top