<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (10) TMI 1479 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459877</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the appeal challenging CCI&#039;s investigation order under Section 26(1) of Competition Act, 2002. The appellant contested the investigation into alleged cartelization and bid-rigging among cement companies. The court held that investigation orders are administrative in nature and not subject to detailed judicial review at preliminary stages. The CCI had formed a prima facie opinion based on information from ONGC requiring investigation by DG. The court distinguished the case from SC precedent in Rajasthan Cylinders, noting that judgment was rendered after final orders while present case was at premature stage. The appellant was granted access to relevant documents for proper defense in subsequent proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2025 18:56:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=785600" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 1479 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459877</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the appeal challenging CCI&#039;s investigation order under Section 26(1) of Competition Act, 2002. The appellant contested the investigation into alleged cartelization and bid-rigging among cement companies. The court held that investigation orders are administrative in nature and not subject to detailed judicial review at preliminary stages. The CCI had formed a prima facie opinion based on information from ONGC requiring investigation by DG. The court distinguished the case from SC precedent in Rajasthan Cylinders, noting that judgment was rendered after final orders while present case was at premature stage. The appellant was granted access to relevant documents for proper defense in subsequent proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Law of Competition</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459877</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>