https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347439 Once the Commission recorded that no contravention of the Competition Act, 2002 was made out, it had no jurisdiction to issue further policy-like directions to the State Government on the flexi rate scheme and route classification. That additional direction was therefore set aside as beyond the Commission's adjudicatory power. The findings that the appellant was dominant in the relevant market, but had not abused its dominant position, were left undisturbed because they had not been challenged by the informant and no basis existed to interfere with the conclusion that Section 4 was not violated. en-us Wed, 02 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Sep 2017 08:19:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347439 Once the Commission recorded that no contravention of the Competition Act, 2002 was made out, it had no jurisdiction to issue further policy-like directions to the State Government on the flexi rate scheme and route classification. That additional direction was therefore set aside as beyond the Commission's adjudicatory power. The findings that the appellant was dominant in the relevant market, but had not abused its dominant position, were left undisturbed because they had not been challenged by the informant and no basis existed to interfere with the conclusion that Section 4 was not violated. Case-Laws Law of Competition Wed, 02 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347439