Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
SC held that Schott India's volume-based discount scheme did not constitute anti-competitive behavior. The Court found no evidence of discriminatory pricing, exclusionary practices, or market foreclosure. The functional rebate and long-term supply agreement were deemed objectively justified. Critically, the Court emphasized that an effects-based harm analysis is essential under Section 4 of the Competition Act. The investigation was procedurally flawed due to denial of cross-examination, rendering the Competition Commission's original order invalid. The Appellate Tribunal's decision was affirmed, and the complainant was ordered to pay Rs. 500,000 in costs.
SC held that Schott India's volume-based discount scheme did not constitute anti-competitive behavior. The Court found no evidence of discriminatory pricing, exclusionary practices, or market foreclosure. The functional rebate and long-term supply agreement were deemed objectively justified. Critically, the Court emphasized that an effects-based harm analysis is essential under Section 4 of the Competition Act. The investigation was procedurally flawed due to denial of cross-examination, rendering the Competition Commission's original order invalid. The Appellate Tribunal's decision was affirmed, and the complainant was ordered to pay Rs. 500,000 in costs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
