https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795573 Exclusive supply and incentive arrangements require material evidence of actual foreclosure, denial of market access, or appreciable adverse effect on competition. The notes state that take-or-pay off-take arrangements for stainless-steel inputs did not amount to exclusive dealing or refusal to deal because alternative domestic and international sources remained available and no competitor was shown to have been refused supply. Although a downstream CRSS supplier was prima facie dominant, no production constraint, competitive disadvantage, or input denial was established. Voluntary, non-binding customer MoUs with incremental incentives, anti-counterfeiting measures, and no exclusive sourcing or purchase obligations similarly did not demonstrate customer lock-in or abuse of dominance. en-us Tue, 21 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:36:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795573 Exclusive supply and incentive arrangements require material evidence of actual foreclosure, denial of market access, or appreciable adverse effect on competition. The notes state that take-or-pay off-take arrangements for stainless-steel inputs did not amount to exclusive dealing or refusal to deal because alternative domestic and international sources remained available and no competitor was shown to have been refused supply. Although a downstream CRSS supplier was prima facie dominant, no production constraint, competitive disadvantage, or input denial was established. Voluntary, non-binding customer MoUs with incremental incentives, anti-counterfeiting measures, and no exclusive sourcing or purchase obligations similarly did not demonstrate customer lock-in or abuse of dominance. Case-Laws Law of Competition Tue, 21 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795573