https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762016 Parallel pricing in the tender process, without additional material showing collusion, concerted action or a meeting of minds, was held insufficient to support an inference of cartelisation or bid rigging under the Competition Act; no prima facie case under Section 3 was made out. The Commission also held that a procurer may set eligibility and technical conditions to suit procurement needs, and such specifications are not anti-competitive merely because they limit participation; on the record, dominance and abuse under Section 4 were not established. Accordingly, no prima facie contravention was found and the matter was closed. en-us Fri, 12 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Nov 2024 07:50:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762016 Parallel pricing in the tender process, without additional material showing collusion, concerted action or a meeting of minds, was held insufficient to support an inference of cartelisation or bid rigging under the Competition Act; no prima facie case under Section 3 was made out. The Commission also held that a procurer may set eligibility and technical conditions to suit procurement needs, and such specifications are not anti-competitive merely because they limit participation; on the record, dominance and abuse under Section 4 were not established. Accordingly, no prima facie contravention was found and the matter was closed. Case-Laws Law of Competition Fri, 12 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762016