https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312698 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, dismissed the appeal without costs, finding no merit in the claims of abuse of dominant position against Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 2. The Tribunal concluded that Respondent No. 1 did not hold a dominant position in the passenger car segment in India and that the termination of the dealership agreement did not constitute an abuse of dominance. It also dismissed the competition concerns regarding financial loss to the Appellant and the State of Gujarat, and rejected the argument that the information filed with the CCI was retaliatory in nature. en-us Mon, 25 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Mar 2024 20:27:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312698 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, dismissed the appeal without costs, finding no merit in the claims of abuse of dominant position against Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 2. The Tribunal concluded that Respondent No. 1 did not hold a dominant position in the passenger car segment in India and that the termination of the dealership agreement did not constitute an abuse of dominance. It also dismissed the competition concerns regarding financial loss to the Appellant and the State of Gujarat, and rejected the argument that the information filed with the CCI was retaliatory in nature. Case-Laws Law of Competition Mon, 25 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312698