https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367108 The court partially upheld the appeal, directing the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to permit cross-examination of three witnesses, thus addressing concerns of natural justice. However, it affirmed the CCI's rejection of the recall application, noting that it did not meet the necessary criteria for reconsideration. Additionally, the court validated the issuance of notices to Cadila's officials under Section 48, confirming that proceedings against the company and its officials can occur concurrently. The court also endorsed the validity of the Director General's investigation, affirming its compliance with legal standards. en-us Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Sep 2018 07:38:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367108 The court partially upheld the appeal, directing the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to permit cross-examination of three witnesses, thus addressing concerns of natural justice. However, it affirmed the CCI's rejection of the recall application, noting that it did not meet the necessary criteria for reconsideration. Additionally, the court validated the issuance of notices to Cadila's officials under Section 48, confirming that proceedings against the company and its officials can occur concurrently. The court also endorsed the validity of the Director General's investigation, affirming its compliance with legal standards. Case-Laws Law of Competition Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367108