<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2013 (7) TMI 250 - TRIBUNAL DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235092</link>
    <description>Under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, a notice of enquiry may be discharged where the complaint has effectively been abandoned and no concrete material shows that the agreement is being used to enforce boycott or compel a restrictive undertaking. The agreement dated 10.06.1994 was examined, but it did not confer any power to mandate boycott or force a producer or distributor to sign a restrictive undertaking. In the absence of evidence that the agreement was being acted upon in a manner attracting restrictive trade practice consequences, continuation of the enquiry was unwarranted, and the notice was discharged against all respondents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197502" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 250 - TRIBUNAL DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235092</link>
      <description>Under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, a notice of enquiry may be discharged where the complaint has effectively been abandoned and no concrete material shows that the agreement is being used to enforce boycott or compel a restrictive undertaking. The agreement dated 10.06.1994 was examined, but it did not confer any power to mandate boycott or force a producer or distributor to sign a restrictive undertaking. In the absence of evidence that the agreement was being acted upon in a manner attracting restrictive trade practice consequences, continuation of the enquiry was unwarranted, and the notice was discharged against all respondents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235092</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>