The Commission notes that cartelisation, including bid rigging, is a pernicious form of anti-competitive conduct under the provisions of Section 3 of the Act. None of the Opposite Parties or their individuals have been able to rebut the evidence found against them by the DG of having indulged in anti-competitive conduct and manipulating the bids/bid rigging in respect of tenders floated by the Department of Agriculture, State of Uttar Pradesh.
The Commission is of the opinion that a work experience requirement of one year or minimum turnover requirement as alleged in the Information, does not in itself can be said to be anti-competitive.
Rohit Arora Vs. Zomato Private Limited (now Zomato Limited) (Competition Commission of India) On careful perusal of the Information, material available on record and submissions filed by the parties, the Commission finds that the grievance of the Informant primarily stems from the three incidents cited in the Information. The first incident pertains to the food […]
Mere commonality of ownership does not imply contravention of the provisions of Section 3(3)(d) of the Act, unless there is material on record to substantiate the allegations of bid rigging by way of collusion.
CCI observes that certain restrictions which are placed on exclusive outlets/dealers by the manufacturers may not always be termed as anti-competitive. An exclusive arrangement in a vertical chain is not an anathema under competition law, when supported by circumstances warranting such exclusivity when looked at objectively.
Vipul Jain Vs. Samsung India Electronics Private Limited and Others (Competition Commission of India) It has been stated that during the course of his business, the Informant has discovered that OPs have formed a cartel in response to certain tenders floated by various government departments for procurement of smartphones, It has been alleged that OP-1 […]
Jaya Prakash vs. ITO (ITAT Bangalore) ITAT defines the meaning of ‘set aside’ and directs that AO can’t do fresh assessment if assessment order was set aside by ITAT. Read Original Order here- Sale Consideration cannot be Determined merely on Form 26AS BRIEF FACTS: 1. The assessee herein came in appeal before the Tribunal and […]
With regard to the issue of the delay in circulation of the CoC minutes, the regulation 24(7) of the CIRP Regulation states that: 24. Conduct of meeting. (7) The resolution professional shall circulate the minutes of the meeting to all participants by electronic means within forty-eight hours of the said meeting. The DC notes the […]
Smarkworks Coworking Spaces Pvt. Ltd Vs Turbot HQ India Pvt. Ltd. (NCLT Cuttack) The Liquidated Damages will crystalize only after the adjudication by the competent Civil Court. This cannot be determined in the Insolvency Proceedings; undecided claim cannot be used to bring an application for insolvency. When the agreement is engrossed on unstamped paper, the […]
The DC notes the submission of Mr. Gupta, that despite his best efforts, he did not get any information, documents, records or books of account of the CD and he had to struggle to get hold of the relevant documents, records and information relating to the CD. The DC also notes the submission of Mr. […]
