https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102484 Claims that a prospectus and publicity material falsely or disparagingly promoted Form-Fill-Seal technology were rejected because the material did not prove the statements to be false or misleading. The Commission held that the Indian Pharmacopoeia sets minimum standards but does not bar improved manufacturing technology or a higher level of sterilisation. It also held that describing a process as modern, internationally accepted, or superior does not amount to unfair trade practice unless the claims are shown to be false or to denigrate a rival product. The complaint under section 36A(1)(x) therefore failed. en-us Tue, 03 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Apr 2019 10:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102484 Claims that a prospectus and publicity material falsely or disparagingly promoted Form-Fill-Seal technology were rejected because the material did not prove the statements to be false or misleading. The Commission held that the Indian Pharmacopoeia sets minimum standards but does not bar improved manufacturing technology or a higher level of sterilisation. It also held that describing a process as modern, internationally accepted, or superior does not amount to unfair trade practice unless the claims are shown to be false or to denigrate a rival product. The complaint under section 36A(1)(x) therefore failed. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 03 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102484