<?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>2011 (5) TMI 1160 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459896</link>
    <description>A party is not entitled to cross-examine chartered accountants on a certificate relied upon in an investigation report where no witness was examined to prove that document, especially when rebuttal by affidavit and other material was allowed. The refusal to permit cross-examination was therefore upheld. Confidential buyer-wise information may also remain undisclosed where the Commission is satisfied that the material is commercially sensitive and confidentiality is justified under the regulatory framework; disclosure is not required merely because a party seeks it for defence. The refusal to disclose the information was upheld, and the writ petition failed in full.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2025 23:38:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=786028" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 1160 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459896</link>
      <description>A party is not entitled to cross-examine chartered accountants on a certificate relied upon in an investigation report where no witness was examined to prove that document, especially when rebuttal by affidavit and other material was allowed. The refusal to permit cross-examination was therefore upheld. Confidential buyer-wise information may also remain undisclosed where the Commission is satisfied that the material is commercially sensitive and confidentiality is justified under the regulatory framework; disclosure is not required merely because a party seeks it for defence. The refusal to disclose the information was upheld, and the writ petition failed in full.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Law of Competition</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459896</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>