https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287726 A prize scheme used to promote detergent sales was analysed under the definition of unfair trade practice in Section 36A(3)(a) of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. The text explains that a promotional practice alone is insufficient; there must also be cogent material showing consumer injury, or a likely effect on competition or consumers within the statutory scheme. It further notes that a cease and desist order with penal consequences cannot rest on a bare complaint or on an assumption that prize costs were built into product price without supporting evidence. The finding under Section 36A(3)(a) was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh evidence. en-us Tue, 06 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:42:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287726 A prize scheme used to promote detergent sales was analysed under the definition of unfair trade practice in Section 36A(3)(a) of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. The text explains that a promotional practice alone is insufficient; there must also be cogent material showing consumer injury, or a likely effect on competition or consumers within the statutory scheme. It further notes that a cease and desist order with penal consequences cannot rest on a bare complaint or on an assumption that prize costs were built into product price without supporting evidence. The finding under Section 36A(3)(a) was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh evidence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 06 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287726