Skip to content

CMA Final · Indirect Tax Laws and Practice · Anti-profiteering

Which statement about the Director General of Anti-profiteering's handling of evidence and confidential information is consistent with the Rules?

Evidence given by one interested party is shared with the others, but confidential information is protected by applying section 11 of the Right to Information Act mutatis mutandis. The DG may ask for a non-confidential summary, and if that is impossible the party may submit a statement of reasons.

  1. AEvidence presented by one interested party is made available to other interested parties, but confidential information is governed by section 11 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 applied mutatis mutandis, and a non-confidential summary may be requiredCorrect
  2. BAll evidence, including confidential information, must be disclosed to every interested party without exception
  3. CEvidence of one party is never shared; only the final report is shared with others
  4. DConfidential information must be disclosed if the party cannot summarise it, since no statement of reasons is allowed

Explanation

The Rules require evidence of one interested party to be made available to others, but this is subject to the confidentiality rule, which applies section 11 of the RTI Act mutatis mutandis. The DG may ask for a non-confidential summary, and if summarisation is impossible the party may submit a statement of reasons. The other options contradict this.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Anti-profiteering shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Anti-profiteeringFree diagnostic mock

More Anti-profiteering questions