https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785408 A competition-law challenge examined alleged cartelisation among vendor entities, but the stated facts did not support a Section 3 contravention because the relationship was vertical, not horizontal, and the entities were not shown to be competing at the same market level. The article also notes that prescribing IRC accreditation for inclusion in an identified vendors list did not establish abuse under Section 4, since dominance in the relevant market for crystalline durability admixture procurement in heavy infrastructure projects in India was not shown. It further records that closing the matter without a Director General investigation was procedurally unobjectionable because no prima facie case had been found. en-us Tue, 20 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Jan 2026 09:10:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785408 A competition-law challenge examined alleged cartelisation among vendor entities, but the stated facts did not support a Section 3 contravention because the relationship was vertical, not horizontal, and the entities were not shown to be competing at the same market level. The article also notes that prescribing IRC accreditation for inclusion in an identified vendors list did not establish abuse under Section 4, since dominance in the relevant market for crystalline durability admixture procurement in heavy infrastructure projects in India was not shown. It further records that closing the matter without a Director General investigation was procedurally unobjectionable because no prima facie case had been found. Case-Laws Law of Competition Tue, 20 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785408