https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342804 The court upheld the COMPAT's decision, affirming the applicability of Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002, to the 2009 tender, and confirmed the CCI's jurisdiction to investigate the 2011 tender. It found the appellants engaged in anti-competitive practices, violating Sections 3(3)(a), 3(3)(b), and 3(3)(d) of the Act. The court endorsed the COMPAT's approach to calculating penalties based on relevant turnover rather than total turnover, emphasizing proportionality. Consequently, the appeals by both the appellants and the CCI were dismissed, with no order as to costs. en-us Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Apr 2022 11:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342804 The court upheld the COMPAT's decision, affirming the applicability of Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002, to the 2009 tender, and confirmed the CCI's jurisdiction to investigate the 2011 tender. It found the appellants engaged in anti-competitive practices, violating Sections 3(3)(a), 3(3)(b), and 3(3)(d) of the Act. The court endorsed the COMPAT's approach to calculating penalties based on relevant turnover rather than total turnover, emphasizing proportionality. Consequently, the appeals by both the appellants and the CCI were dismissed, with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Law of Competition Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342804