Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
NCLAT dismissed the appellant's challenge to CCI's order closing an abuse of dominant position complaint concerning FCM injections. It held that, as FCM was a patented drug of Respondent No. 2 at the relevant time, the Patent Act prevails over the Competition Act, and CCI lacks jurisdiction to examine alleged anti-competitive conduct directly arising from exercise of patent rights. Relying on Section 3(5) of the Competition Act, the Tribunal emphasized that reasonable conditions imposed to protect patent rights are exempt from competition scrutiny. Finding no prima facie infringement of competition law and upholding CCI's view, the appeal was rejected.
NCLAT dismissed the appellant's challenge to CCI's order closing an abuse of dominant position complaint concerning FCM injections. It held that, as FCM was a patented drug of Respondent No. 2 at the relevant time, the Patent Act prevails over the Competition Act, and CCI lacks jurisdiction to examine alleged anti-competitive conduct directly arising from exercise of patent rights. Relying on Section 3(5) of the Competition Act, the Tribunal emphasized that reasonable conditions imposed to protect patent rights are exempt from competition scrutiny. Finding no prima facie infringement of competition law and upholding CCI's view, the appeal was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.