Contributor Page
Vaish Associates Advocates
Email  |  Website  |  Articles
Contact Details
Tel: +91 11 42492532
Fax: +91 11 23320484
Mohan Dev Building
1st & 11th Floors
13 Tolstoy Marg
New Delhi
By Vijay Pal Dalmia, Partner
If it was the intention of the legislature to hold up the prosecution proceedings till the assessment proceedings are completed by way of appeal or otherwise the same would have been provided in Section 276CC itself.
Will India prove to be the nemesis for the Digital Cab Aggregator Giant Uber ?
According to CCI, NSTPL was merely an informant, and had no relevant role to play in the investigations.
The DG submitted its investigation report on 26.02.2013 holding that none of the parties named in the information contravened Section 3 of the Act.
The Petitioner contended that the decision of the CCI was erroneous as it rejected the DG Report which recommended violation of Section 4 of the Act.
It was alleged that SAAR was a pre-determined winner and CADD and Pentacle were mere proxy bidders.
The informant also cited a scenario where an Indian film is released on the same weekend as a Hollywood film.
The DG noted that out of the 53 bidders who submitted their bids, several entities had common or related managements.
One of these services is the charter-hire of OSVs which are specialized vessels that support various stages of offshore O&NG E&P activities.
The matter was directed to re investigate and submit a supplementary report .
Intel averred that the entire claim of the Informant is based on Intel allegedly refusing to entertain its warranty service claims on two Boxed Micro-processors in India.
The Indian automobile industry is the fourth largest in the world.
It was also alleged that similar Discount Control Mechanism is also being implemented by MSIL across India- specifically in cities where more than 4-5 dealers operate.
The present case was initiated on the basis of a lesser penalty application by NSK which revealed the existence of the cartel.
By Vijay Pal Dalmia, Partner
A conjoint reading of the various provisions would reveal, that the Assessing Officer can charge the taxes only from the assessment year commencing on or after 01.04.2016.
Contributor's Topics