Misplaced Pages

Competition Commission of India: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:37, 14 March 2014 editCommons sibi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users927 edits →Notable cases: Fine on BCDA (edited with ProveIt)← Previous edit Latest revision as of 14:05, 10 December 2024 edit undoLakhan Singh Bhargav (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users640 editsNo edit summaryTags: Visual edit Mobile edit Mobile web edit 
(183 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Competition regulator in India}}
{{EngvarB|date=February 2014}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=February 2014}}

{{Infobox government agency {{Infobox government agency
|agency_name = Competition Commission of India | name = Competition Commission of India
|nativename = भारतीय प्रतिस्पर्धा आयोग<ref name="Photo of CCI title">{{cite news|title=Photo of CCI title|url=http://www.livemint.com/rf/Image-621x414/LiveMint/Period1/2013/02/09/Photos/CCI1--621x414.jpg|accessdate=10 February 2013|newspaper=live mint}}</ref> | native_name = भारतीय प्रतिस्पर्धा आयोग
| native_name_r =
|nativename_a =
| type = Commission
|nativename_r =
|logo = | seal = Emblem of India (navy blue).svg
|logo_width = | seal_width = 150px
|logo_caption = | seal_caption =
|seal = | logo = Logo of the Competition Commission of India.svg
|seal_width = | logo_size = 120px
|seal_caption = | logo_caption =
|picture = | picture =
|picture_width = | picture_width =
|picture_caption = | picture_caption =
|formed = 14 October 2003 | formed = {{Start date and age|df=yes|paren=yes|br=yes|2003|10|14}}
|preceding1 = Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission<ref name="Section 66 in The Competition Act, 2002">{{cite web|title=Section 66 in The Competition Act, 2002|url=http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1949393/|accessdate=10 February 2013}}</ref> | preceding1 = Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission
|preceding2 = <!-- (etc.) --> | preceding2 = <!-- (etc.) -->
|dissolved = | dissolved =
|superseding = | superseding =
|jurisdiction = ] | jurisdiction = {{flagicon|India}} ]
|headquarters = ] | headquarters = Competition Commission of India 9th Floor, Office Block - 1, Kidwai Nagar (East), ] 110023, India.
| coordinates = <!--{{coord|LATITUDE|LONGITUDE|type:landmark_region:US|display=inline,title}}-->
|latd= |latm= |lats= |latNS=
| motto =
|longd= |longm= |longs= |longEW=
|region_code = | employees =
| budget = 756.19 Crore (for Financial Year 2023–24)
|coordinates = <!--{{coord|LATITUDE|LONGITUDE|type:landmark_region:US|display=inline,title}}-->
| minister1_name = ]
|motto =
| minister1_pfo =
|employees =
| minister2_name =
|budget =
| minister2_pfo = <!-- (etc.) -->
|minister1_name =
| deputyminister1_name =
|minister1_pfo =
| deputyminister1_pfo =
|minister2_name =
| deputyminister2_name =
|minister2_pfo = <!-- (etc.) -->
| deputyminister2_pfo = <!-- (etc.) -->
|deputyminister1_name =
| chief1_name = Ravneet Kaur IAS
|deputyminister1_pfo =
| chief1_position = ''{{small|(Chairperson)}}''
|deputyminister2_name =
| chief2_name = Inder Pal Singh Bindra, IRS
|deputyminister2_pfo = <!-- (etc.) -->
| chief2_position = ''{{small|(Secretary)}}''
|chief1_name = Ashok Chawla
| chief3_name =
|chief1_position =
| chief3_position =
|chief2_name =
| chief4_name =
|chief2_position = <!-- (etc.) -->
| chief4_position =
|agency_type =
| chief5_name =
|parent_department =
| chief5_position =
|parent_agency =
| parent_department =
|child1_agency =
| parent_agency =
|child2_agency = <!-- (etc.) -->
| child1_agency =
|keydocument1 = <!-- (etc.) -->
| child2_agency = <!-- (etc.) -->
|website = {{URL|cci.gov.in}}
| keydocument1 = <!-- (etc.) -->
|footnotes =
|map = | website = {{URL|https://www.cci.gov.in}}
|map_width = | footnotes =
|map_caption = | map =
| map_width =
| map_caption =
}} }}
{{Use Indian English|date=August 2015}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=August 2020}}


'''Competition Commission of India''' is a body of the ] responsible for enforcing ] throughout India and to prevent activities that have an adverse effect on competition in India. It was established on 14 October 2003. It became fully functional in May 2009.<ref name="CCI formation">{{cite web|title=CCI formation|url=http://www.cci.gov.in/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18|publisher=CCI|accessdate=4 January 2013}}</ref><ref name="CCI through the eyes of the media: Doing well!">{{cite news|title=CCI through the eyes of the media: Doing well!|url=http://www.moneylife.in/article/competition-commission-through-the-eyes-of-the-media-doing-well/28549.html|accessdate=4 January 2013|newspaper=MoneyControl.com|date=18 September 2012}}</ref> The '''Competition Commission of India''' ('''CCI''') is the chief national ] in ]. It is a ] body within the ] and is responsible for enforcing the ] to promote ] and prevent activities that have an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India. The CCI looks into cases and investigates them if the same has a negative impact on competition.

CCI also approves combination under the act so that two merging entities do not overtake the market.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ghosh |first=Saptaparno |date=2023-09-09 |title=The Competition Commission’s proposed regulations on merger thresholds {{!}} Explained |url=https://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/the-competition-commissions-proposed-regulations-on-merger-thresholds-explained/article67284593.ece |access-date=2024-10-01 |work=The Hindu |language=en-IN |issn=0971-751X}}</ref>

The commission was established on 14 October 2003. It became fully functional in May 2009 with ] as its first chairman.<ref name="CCI formation">{{cite web|title=CCI formation|url=http://www.cci.gov.in/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18|publisher=CCI|access-date=4 January 2013}}</ref><ref name="CCI through the eyes of the media: Doing well!">{{cite news|title=CCI through the eyes of the media: Doing well!|url=http://www.moneylife.in/article/competition-commission-through-the-eyes-of-the-media-doing-well/28549.html|access-date=4 January 2013|newspaper=MoneyControl.com|date=18 September 2012}}</ref> The current Chairperson of the CCI is Ravneet Kaur, who was appointed to the role in 2023.


==The Competition Act, 2002== ==The Competition Act, 2002==
{{main|The Competition Act, 2002}} {{main|The Competition Act, 2002}}


The idea of Competition Commission was conceived and introduced in the form of the Competition Act, 2002 by the ]. A need was felt to promote competition and private enterprise especially in the light of ].<ref>{{cite news|title=In fact: How India learnt to promote, and regulate, competition|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/in-fact-how-india-learnt-to-promote-and-regulate-competition-2829625/|access-date=2 March 2017}}</ref>
The Competition Act, 2002, as amended by the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2007, follows the philosophy of modern competition laws. The Act prohibits anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant position by enterprises and regulates combinations (acquisition, acquiring of control and ]), which causes or likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition within India.<ref name="The Competition Act - Act No. 12 of 2003">{{cite web|title=The Competition Act – Act No. 12 of 2003|url=http://www.cci.gov.in/images/media/competition_act/act2002.pdf|publisher=Competition Commission of India|accessdate=10 October 2012}}</ref>


The Competition Act, 2002, as amended by the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2007, follows the philosophy of modern competition laws. The Act prohibits anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant position by enterprises and regulates combinations (acquisition, acquiring of control and ]), which causes or likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition within India.<ref name="The Competition Act - Act No. 12 of 2003">{{cite web|title=The Competition Act – Act No. 12 of 2003|url=http://www.cci.gov.in/images/media/competition_act/act2002.pdf|publisher=Competition Commission of India|access-date=10 October 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120627063249/http://www.cci.gov.in/images/media/competition_act/act2002.pdf|archive-date=27 June 2012|df=dmy-all}}</ref>
The objectives of the Act are sought to be achieved through the Competition Commission of India (CCI), which has been established by the Central Government with effect from 14 October 2003. CCI consists of a Chairperson and 6 Members appointed by the Central Government.

It is the duty of the Commission to eliminate practices having adverse effect on competition, promote and sustain competition, protect the interests of consumers and ensure freedom of trade in the markets of India.<ref name="The Competition Act - Act No. 12 of 2003"/>
The Commission is also required to give opinion on competition issues on a reference received from a statutory authority established under any law and to undertake competition advocacy, create public awareness and impart training on competition issues.<ref name="The Competition Act - Act No. 12 of 2003"/> The objectives of the act are sought to be achieved through the Competition Commission of India (CCI), which has been established by the Central Government with effect from 14 October 2003. CCI consists of a chairperson and six members appointed by the Central Government. It is the duty of the commission to eliminate practices having adverse effect on competition, promote and sustain competition, protect the interests of consumers and ensure freedom of trade in the markets of India.<ref name="The Competition Act - Act No. 12 of 2003"/>
The commission is also required to give an opinion on competition issues on a reference received from a ] established under any law and to undertake competition advocacy, create public awareness and impart training on competition issues.<ref name="The Competition Act - Act No. 12 of 2003"/>


== Objectives == == Objectives ==
Line 76: Line 83:
An Act to provide, keeping in view of the economic development of the country, for the establishment of a Commission to prevent practices having adverse effect on competition, to promote and sustain competition in markets, to protect the interests of consumers and to ensure freedom of trade carried on by other participants in markets, in India, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.<ref name="The Competition Act - Act No. 12 of 2003"/> An Act to provide, keeping in view of the economic development of the country, for the establishment of a Commission to prevent practices having adverse effect on competition, to promote and sustain competition in markets, to protect the interests of consumers and to ensure freedom of trade carried on by other participants in markets, in India, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.<ref name="The Competition Act - Act No. 12 of 2003"/>


To achieve its objectives, the Competition Commission of India endeavours to do the following: To achieve its objectives, the Competition Commission of India endeavors to do the following:
* Make the markets work for the benefit and welfare of consumers. * Make the markets work for the benefit and welfare of consumers.
* Ensure fair and healthy competition in economic activities in the country for faster and inclusive growth and development of economy. * Ensure fair and healthy competition in economic activities in the country for faster and ] and development of the economy.
* Implement competition policies with an aim to effectuate the most efficient utilization of economic resources. * Implement competition policies with an aim to effectuate the most efficient utilization of economic resources.
* Develop and nurture effective relations and interactions with sectoral regulators to ensure smooth alignment of sectoral regulatory laws in tandem with the competition law. * Develop and nurture effective relations and interactions with sectoral regulators to ensure smooth alignment of sectoral regulatory laws in tandem with competition law.
* Effectively carry out competition advocacy and spread the information on benefits of competition among all stakeholders to establish and nurture competition culture in Indian economy. * Effectively carry out competition advocacy and spread the information on benefits of competition among all stakeholders to establish and nurture competition culture in Indian economy.


==Composition== ==Composition==
]
The Commission comprises a Chairperson and six members. Ashok Chawla is the current Chairperson of the CCI.<ref name="CCI - Organogram">{{cite web|title=CCI – Organogram|url=http://www.cci.gov.in/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=117 option=com_content&task=view&id=117|publisher=Competition Commission of India|accessdate=12 October 2013}}</ref> The members of the Competition Commission of India are:
The commission comprises a chairperson and not less than two and not more than six other members appointed by the Central Government. Ravneet Kaur is the current chairperson of the CCI.<ref name="CCI - Organogram">{{cite web|url=http://www.cci.gov.in/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=117option=com_content&task=view&id=117|title=CCI – Organogram|publisher=Competition Commission of India|access-date=12 October 2013}}</ref> The members of the Competition Commission of India are:<ref>{{Cite news |last=Kalra |first=Aditya |date=2023-09-19 |title=India names ex-government official, former WhatsApp exec as new antitrust members, sources say |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-antitrust-body-appoints-former-govt-official-whatsapp-exec-new-members-2023-09-19/ |access-date=2023-09-19}}</ref>
# S.L. Bunker
# S.N. Dhingra
# Geeta Gouri
# Anurag Goel
# M.L. Tayal
# (member vacant)


# Ravneet Kaur
== Notable cases ==
# Anil Agarwal
* In December 2010, CCI instituted a probe to examine if there was any cartelisation among traders when onion prices touched 80 rupees, but did not find sufficient evidence of market manipulation .<ref>{{cite news|title = Competition panel to probe hoarding, onion price rigging|date = 15 August 2013|url = http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/WorldEconomy/Competition-panel-to-probe-hoarding-onion-price-rigging/Article1-1108457.aspx|newspaper = Hindustan Times|edition = New Delhi|first = Mahua|last = Venkatesh|accessdate = 16 August 2013}}</ref>
# Sweta Kakkad
* In June 2012, CCI imposed a fine of {{INRConvert|63.07|b}} 11 cement companies for ]isation. CCI claimed that cement companies met regularly to fix prices, control market share and hold back supply which earned them illegal profits.<ref name="Competition Commission of India imposes Rs 63.07&nbsp;billion penalty on 11 cement companies">{{cite news|title=Competition Commission of India imposes Rs 6,307 crore penalty on 11 cement companies|url=http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-06-22/news/32368892_1_cement-makers-madras-cements-jk-cement|accessdate=4 January 2013|newspaper=Economic Times|date=22 June 2012}}</ref><ref name="Busted: 'Cartelising' cement firms">{{cite news|title=Busted: 'Cartelising' cement firms|url=http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/busted-cartelising-cement-firms/478491/|accessdate=4 January 2013|newspaper=Business Standard|date=26 June 2012}}</ref>
# Deepak Anurag


== Notable cases and actions ==
* In January 2013, CCI modified clauses in agreements between real estate company ] and apartment buyers.<ref name="Competition Commission of India modifies DLF-buyer agreements">{{cite news|title=Competition Commission of India modifies DLF-buyer agreements|url=http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/real-estate/news/cci-modifies-dlf-buyer-agreements/articleshow/17879672.cms|accessdate=4 January 2013|newspaper=Economic Times|date=4 January 2013}}</ref> Business and finance p] ] welcomed the order saying that, "This is a landmark ruling and will benefit property owners across the country". Some of the important modifications were:
* In December 2010, CCI instituted a probe to examine if there was any cartelization among traders when onion prices touched 80 rupees, but did not find enough evidence of ].<ref>{{cite news|title = Competition panel to probe hoarding, onion price rigging|date = 15 August 2013|url = http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/WorldEconomy/Competition-panel-to-probe-hoarding-onion-price-rigging/Article1-1108457.aspx|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20130816180140/http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/WorldEconomy/Competition-panel-to-probe-hoarding-onion-price-rigging/Article1-1108457.aspx|url-status = dead|archive-date = 16 August 2013|newspaper = Hindustan Times|edition = New Delhi|first = Mahua|last = Venkatesh|access-date = 16 August 2013}}</ref>
** The Builder can not undertake any additional construction beyond the approved building plan given to the buyers.<ref name="Competition Commission of India modifies DLF-buyer agreements"/> The builder will not have complete ownership of open spaces within the residential project area not sold.<ref name="Competition Commission of India modifies DLF-buyer agreements"/> Not just the buyer but the builder will be liable for any defaults.<ref name="CCI ruling on DLF: Changing the builder-buyer equation?">{{cite news|title=CCI ruling on DLF: Changing the builder-buyer equation?|url=http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/cci-rulingdlf-changingbuilder-buyer-equation_803652.html|accessdate=4 January 2013|newspaper=Money Control|date=4 January 2013}}</ref> All payments made by the buyers must be based on construction milestones and not "on demand".<ref name="CCI ruling on DLF: Changing the builder-buyer equation?"/> The builder will not have the sole power to form the ''owner’s association''.<ref name="CCI ruling on DLF: Changing the builder-buyer equation?"/>
* In June 2012, CCI imposed a fine of {{INRConvert|63.07|b}} on 11 cement companies for ]isation. CCI claimed that cement companies met regularly to fix prices, control market share and hold back supply which earned them illegal profits.<ref name="Competition Commission of India imposes Rs 63.07&nbsp;billion penalty on 11 cement companies">{{cite news|title=Competition Commission of India imposes Rs 6,307 crore penalty on 11 cement companies|url=http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/busted-cartelising-cement-firms/478491/|access-date=4 January 2013|newspaper=Business Standard|date=26 June 2012}}</ref>
* In January 2013, CCI modified clauses in agreements between real estate company ] and apartment buyers.<ref name="Competition Commission of India modifies DLF-buyer agreements">{{cite news|title=Competition Commission of India modifies DLF-buyer agreements|url=http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/real-estate/news/cci-modifies-dlf-buyer-agreements/articleshow/17879672.cms|access-date=4 January 2013|newspaper=Economic Times|date=4 January 2013}}</ref> Business and finance portal ] welcomed the order saying that, "This is a landmark ruling and will benefit property owners across the country". Some of the important modifications were:
** The Builder cannot undertake any additional construction beyond the approved building plan given to the buyers.<ref name="Competition Commission of India modifies DLF-buyer agreements"/>
** The builder will not have complete ownership of open spaces within the residential project area not sold.<ref name="Competition Commission of India modifies DLF-buyer agreements" />
** Not just the buyer but the builder will be liable for any defaults.<ref name="CCI ruling on DLF: Changing the builder-buyer equation?">{{cite news|title=CCI ruling on DLF: Changing the builder-buyer equation?|url=http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/cci-rulingdlf-changingbuilder-buyer-equation_803652.html|access-date=4 January 2013|newspaper=Money Control|date=4 January 2013}}</ref>
** All payments made by the buyers must be based on construction milestones and not "on demand".<ref name="CCI ruling on DLF: Changing the builder-buyer equation?" />
** The builder will not have the sole power to form the ''owner’s association''.<ref name="CCI ruling on DLF: Changing the builder-buyer equation?" />
* On 8 February 2013, CCI imposed a penalty of {{INRConvert|522|m}} on the ] (BCCI) for misusing its ]. The CCI found that IPL team ownership agreements were unfair and discriminatory and that the terms of the IPL franchise agreements were loaded in favor of BCCI and franchises had no say in the terms of the contract. The CCI ordered BCCI to "cease and desist" from any practice in future denying market access to potential competitors and not use its regulatory powers in deciding matters relating to its commercial activities.<ref name=SS-Barmi-v-BCCI>{{cite web|title=SS-Barmi-v-BCCI|url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/124522532/SS-Barmi-v-BCCI|access-date=8 February 2013|date=8 February 2013}}</ref><ref name="Competition watchdog slaps Rs. 522.4&nbsp;million fine on BCCI">{{cite web|title=Competition watchdog slaps Rs.52.24 crore fine on BCCI|date=8 February 2013|url=http://www.livemint.com/Politics/tz5p5j5vkTEYiIanZXE71J/Competition-watchdog-slaps-5224-crore-fine-on-BCCI.html|publisher=Live Mint|access-date=8 February 2013}}</ref>
* In 2014, CCI imposed a fine of ₹10 million upon ] for failure to comply with the directions given by the Director General seeking information and documents.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=104701 | title=CCI imposes a fine of Rs. 1 Crore upon Google for failure to supply information/ documents in the investigations. | publisher=PIB | date=27 March 2014 | access-date=1 April 2014}}</ref>
*On 25 August 2014, CCI imposed a fine of ₹2544 crores on 14 Indian car manufacturers for failure to provide branded spare parts and diagnostic tools to independent repairers, hampering their ability to repair and maintain certain car models. The companies fined were Maruti Suzuki, Mahindra & Mahindra, Tata Motors, Toyota, Honda, Volkswagen, Fiat, Ford, General Motors, Nissan, Hindustan Motors, Mercedes Benz and Skoda.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.livemint.com/Companies/l7xoA5HRji17Rv2yRLxaHK/CCI-imposes-Rs2554-crore-penalty-on-14-car-makers.html | title=Competition panel fines 14 car makers Rs 2,554 crore | publisher=LiveMint | date=25 August 2014 | access-date=14 November 2018}}</ref>
* On 17 November 2015, CCI imposed a fine of ₹258 crores upon three airlines for cartelization in determining the fuel surcharge on air cargo. A penalty of {{INR|151.69 crores}} was imposed on ], while ] and ] were levied {{INR|63.74 crores}} and {{INR|42.48 crores}} respectively.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.financialexpress.com/industry/companies/cci-imposes-rs-258-crore-fine-on-jet-airways-indigo-spicejet/167006/|title=Cartelisation: CCI imposes Rs 258 crore fine on Jet Airways, IndiGo, SpiceJet|date=18 November 2015|access-date=12 November 2016|via=Financial Express}}</ref>
* In May 2017, CCI ordered a probe into the functioning of the ] following a complaint filed by ] against the cartelization by its rivals Bharati Airtel, Vodafone India and Idea cellular.
* On 8 February 2018, it had fined Google's parent company, ] for {{INR|135.86 crores}} for ].
* On 12 August 2018, the CCI approved the ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://smartinvestor.business-standard.com/market/read-539887-readdet-Fox_Disney_deal_CCI_approves_takeover_of_Murdochs_company_in_India.htm|title=Fox-Disney deal: CCI approves takeover of Murdoch's company in India|last=Malvania|first=Urvi|work=Smart Investor|date=August 12, 2018|access-date=August 18, 2018}}</ref>
* In July 2018 the Commission imposed fines on the ], the Amdavad Chemist Association, the Surat Chemists and Druggists Association, the Chemists and Druggists Association of Baroda, ], ] Ltd, Divine Saviour and their staff and officers for breaches of the Competition Act 2002 by requiring ]s before appointing stockists.<ref>{{cite news |title=CCI fines chemist and druggist associations and pharma companies |url=https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3276c049-0738-4635-82d7-bfbe856cc790 |access-date=11 February 2019 |publisher=Lexology |date=3 January 2019 |archive-date=12 February 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190212130728/https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3276c049-0738-4635-82d7-bfbe856cc790 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
*In May 2019, ] the commission ordered an antitrust probe against Google for abusing its dominant position with ] to block market rivals.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Javeed|first=Umar|date=2021|title=Data and Competition Law: Introducing Data As Non-Monetary Consideration and Competition Concerns in Data-Driven Online Platforms|url=https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3788178|journal=SSRN Electronic Journal|language=en|doi=10.2139/ssrn.3788178|s2cid=233912862|issn=1556-5068}}</ref> In its Prima Facie opinion the commission held, "Mandatory Pre-installation of entire ] (GMS) suite under Mobile application distribution agreements MADA amounts to imposition of unfair condition on the device manufacturers. Leveraging of ]'s dominance in Google ] to protect relevant markets such as online general search in contravention of Section 4(2)(e) of the ]".<ref name=":0" />
*In June 2019, CCI issued letters to handset makers seeking details of terms and conditions of their agreement with Google. This is to ascertain if Google imposed any restrictions on them for using the company's apps in the past 8 years from 2011.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/software/cci-asks-handset-companies-for-info-on-agreements-with-google/articleshow/69867066.cms|title=CCI asks handset companies for info on agreements with Google|last=Aulakh|first=Gulveen|date=2019-06-20|work=The Economic Times|access-date=2019-06-20}}</ref>
*In December 2021, CCI took a step back from approving ]'s investment in a ] company, which had initially received its nod in November 2019. Amazon has been blamed for concealing the scope and complete information of its investment while seeking for the approval.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Bureau|first=The Hindu|date=2021-12-17|title=CCI slaps ₹200 crore fine on Amazon, freezes Future deal|language=en-IN|work=The Hindu|url=https://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/cci-slaps-202-crore-penalty-on-amazon-suspends-approval-for-future-coupons-deal/article37978487.ece|access-date=2021-12-18|issn=0971-751X}}</ref>
*On 31 December 2021, CCI ordered an investigation into ] business practices, including the company's enforcement of a proprietary payment system, to be conducted within 60 days.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Singh |first=Manish |date=2021-12-31 |title=India antitrust watchdog orders investigation into Apple's business practices |language=en-US |work=TechCrunch |url=https://techcrunch.com/2021/12/31/india-antitrust-watchdog-orders-investigation-into-apples-business-practices/ |access-date=2022-01-02}}</ref>
*In October 2022, CCI imposed a {{INRConvert|1338|c}} penalty on Google for abusing its dominance in the licensing of Android OS for smartphones, app store market for Android, general web search services, non-OS specific mobile web browsers and online video hosting platforms in India. A week later, CCI levied a separate {{INRConvert|936.44|c}} penalty for abusing its Play Store policies. Additionally, it issued a cease-and-desist order directing Google to modify its policies, including allowing mobile application developers to use third-party payment services on its app store.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/cci-fines-google-113-million-in-second-anti-trust-penalty-8229397/ |title=CCI slaps Rs 936-cr penalty on Google for abusing its dominant market position |date=2022-10-26 |work=]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/cci-imposes-rs-936-44-crore-fine-on-google-for-abusing-its-dominance-on-play-store-policies-9390841.html |title=CCI imposes Rs 936.44 crore fine on Google for abusing its dominance on Play Store policies |date=2022-10-25 |last=SN |first=Vikas |work=]}}</ref>
*In November 2024, the CCI fined ] parent company ] {{INRConvert|213|c}} over unlawful practices concerning ].<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-11-18 |title=India restricts WhatsApp sharing data with other Meta entities, imposes $25.4 mln fine |url=https://www.reuters.com/technology/indias-competition-regulator-imposes-254-mln-fine-meta-whatsapps-2021-privacy-2024-11-18/ |access-date=2024-11-18 |website=Reuters}}</ref>


== See also ==
* On 8 February 2013, CCI imposed a penalty of {{INRConvert|522|m}} on the ] (BCCI) for misusing its ]. The CCI found that IPL team ownership agreements were unfair and discriminatory, and that the terms of the IPL franchise agreements were loaded in favour of BCCI and franchises had no say in the terms of the contract. The CCI ordered BCCI to "cease and desist" from any practice in future denying market access to potential competitors and not use its regulatory powers in deciding matters relating to its commercial activities.<ref name=SS-Barmi-v-BCCI>{{cite web|title=SS-Barmi-v-BCCI|url=http://www.scribd.com/doc/124522532/SS-Barmi-v-BCCI|accessdate=8 February 2013|date=8 February 2013}}</ref><ref name="Competition watchdog slaps Rs. 522.4&nbsp;million fine on BCCI">{{cite web|title=Competition watchdog slaps Rs.52.24 crore fine on BCCI|url=http://www.livemint.com/Politics/tz5p5j5vkTEYiIanZXE71J/Competition-watchdog-slaps-5224-crore-fine-on-BCCI.html|publisher=Live Mint|accessdate=8 February 2013}}</ref>


* ]
* In 2014 , CCI has imposed a penalty of Rs. 18.38 crores on Bengal Chemist and Druggist Association (BCDA) and its office bearers for anti-competitive practices. This has been done vide a common order in Suo moto Case No. 02 of 2012 and Reference Case No. 01 of 2013 filed by Dr. Chintamoni Ghosh, Director, Directorate of Drugs, West Bengal. <ref>{{cite web | url=http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=104597 | title=CCI Imposes Penalty of Rs. 18.38 Crores on Bengal Chemist and Druggist Association | publisher=Press Information Bureau | accessdate=14 March 2014}}</ref>


== References == == References ==
Line 107: Line 131:


==External links== ==External links==
* {{official website|www.cci.gov.in}} * {{official website}} Competition Commission of India
* *
*
*
{{Indian commissions}}


{{Indian commissions}}
]


] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 14:05, 10 December 2024

Competition regulator in India
Competition Commission of India
भारतीय प्रतिस्पर्धा आयोग
Commission overview
Formed14 October 2003
(21 years ago) (2003-10-14)
Preceding Commission
  • Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission
JurisdictionIndia Republic of India
HeadquartersCompetition Commission of India 9th Floor, Office Block - 1, Kidwai Nagar (East), New Delhi 110023, India.
Annual budget756.19 Crore (for Financial Year 2023–24)
Minister responsible
Commission executives
  • Ravneet Kaur IAS, (Chairperson)
  • Inder Pal Singh Bindra, IRS, (Secretary)
Websitewww.cci.gov.in

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) is the chief national competition regulator in India. It is a statutory body within the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and is responsible for enforcing the Competition Act, 2002 to promote competition and prevent activities that have an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India. The CCI looks into cases and investigates them if the same has a negative impact on competition.

CCI also approves combination under the act so that two merging entities do not overtake the market.

The commission was established on 14 October 2003. It became fully functional in May 2009 with Dhanendra Kumar as its first chairman. The current Chairperson of the CCI is Ravneet Kaur, who was appointed to the role in 2023.

The Competition Act, 2002

Main article: The Competition Act, 2002

The idea of Competition Commission was conceived and introduced in the form of the Competition Act, 2002 by the Vajpayee government. A need was felt to promote competition and private enterprise especially in the light of 1991 Indian economic liberalisation.

The Competition Act, 2002, as amended by the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2007, follows the philosophy of modern competition laws. The Act prohibits anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant position by enterprises and regulates combinations (acquisition, acquiring of control and Merger and acquisition), which causes or likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition within India.

The objectives of the act are sought to be achieved through the Competition Commission of India (CCI), which has been established by the Central Government with effect from 14 October 2003. CCI consists of a chairperson and six members appointed by the Central Government. It is the duty of the commission to eliminate practices having adverse effect on competition, promote and sustain competition, protect the interests of consumers and ensure freedom of trade in the markets of India. The commission is also required to give an opinion on competition issues on a reference received from a statutory authority established under any law and to undertake competition advocacy, create public awareness and impart training on competition issues.

Objectives

"The main objective of competition law is to promote economic efficiency using competition as one of the means of assisting the creation of market responsive to consumer preferences. The advantages of perfect competition are three-fold: allocative efficiency, which ensures the effective allocation of resources, productive efficiency, which ensures that costs of production are kept at a minimum and dynamic efficiency, which promotes innovative practices."

Supreme Court of India Judgment in Civil Appeal No. 7999 of 2010 pronounced on 9 September 2010

Preamble to the Competition Act

An Act to provide, keeping in view of the economic development of the country, for the establishment of a Commission to prevent practices having adverse effect on competition, to promote and sustain competition in markets, to protect the interests of consumers and to ensure freedom of trade carried on by other participants in markets, in India, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

To achieve its objectives, the Competition Commission of India endeavors to do the following:

  • Make the markets work for the benefit and welfare of consumers.
  • Ensure fair and healthy competition in economic activities in the country for faster and inclusive growth and development of the economy.
  • Implement competition policies with an aim to effectuate the most efficient utilization of economic resources.
  • Develop and nurture effective relations and interactions with sectoral regulators to ensure smooth alignment of sectoral regulatory laws in tandem with competition law.
  • Effectively carry out competition advocacy and spread the information on benefits of competition among all stakeholders to establish and nurture competition culture in Indian economy.

Composition

Competition Commission of India (CCI)
Shri Ashok Chawla, former chairman of the Competition Commission of India, and Mr. Joaquin Almunia, vice-president of the European Commission, signing a Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in the Field of Competition Law on 21st November 2013.

The commission comprises a chairperson and not less than two and not more than six other members appointed by the Central Government. Ravneet Kaur is the current chairperson of the CCI. The members of the Competition Commission of India are:

  1. Ravneet Kaur
  2. Anil Agarwal
  3. Sweta Kakkad
  4. Deepak Anurag

Notable cases and actions

  • In December 2010, CCI instituted a probe to examine if there was any cartelization among traders when onion prices touched 80 rupees, but did not find enough evidence of market manipulation.
  • In June 2012, CCI imposed a fine of ₹63.07 billion (US$760 million) on 11 cement companies for cartelisation. CCI claimed that cement companies met regularly to fix prices, control market share and hold back supply which earned them illegal profits.
  • In January 2013, CCI modified clauses in agreements between real estate company DLF Limited and apartment buyers. Business and finance portal Moneycontrol.com welcomed the order saying that, "This is a landmark ruling and will benefit property owners across the country". Some of the important modifications were:
    • The Builder cannot undertake any additional construction beyond the approved building plan given to the buyers.
    • The builder will not have complete ownership of open spaces within the residential project area not sold.
    • Not just the buyer but the builder will be liable for any defaults.
    • All payments made by the buyers must be based on construction milestones and not "on demand".
    • The builder will not have the sole power to form the owner’s association.
  • On 8 February 2013, CCI imposed a penalty of ₹522 million (US$6.3 million) on the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) for misusing its dominant position. The CCI found that IPL team ownership agreements were unfair and discriminatory and that the terms of the IPL franchise agreements were loaded in favor of BCCI and franchises had no say in the terms of the contract. The CCI ordered BCCI to "cease and desist" from any practice in future denying market access to potential competitors and not use its regulatory powers in deciding matters relating to its commercial activities.
  • In 2014, CCI imposed a fine of ₹10 million upon Google for failure to comply with the directions given by the Director General seeking information and documents.
  • On 25 August 2014, CCI imposed a fine of ₹2544 crores on 14 Indian car manufacturers for failure to provide branded spare parts and diagnostic tools to independent repairers, hampering their ability to repair and maintain certain car models. The companies fined were Maruti Suzuki, Mahindra & Mahindra, Tata Motors, Toyota, Honda, Volkswagen, Fiat, Ford, General Motors, Nissan, Hindustan Motors, Mercedes Benz and Skoda.
  • On 17 November 2015, CCI imposed a fine of ₹258 crores upon three airlines for cartelization in determining the fuel surcharge on air cargo. A penalty of ₹151.69 crores was imposed on Jet Airways, while InterGlobe Aviation Limited (Indigo) and SpiceJet were levied ₹63.74 crores and ₹42.48 crores respectively.
  • In May 2017, CCI ordered a probe into the functioning of the Cellular Operators Association of India following a complaint filed by Reliance Jio against the cartelization by its rivals Bharati Airtel, Vodafone India and Idea cellular.
  • On 8 February 2018, it had fined Google's parent company, Alphabet Inc. for ₹135.86 crores for search bias.
  • On 12 August 2018, the CCI approved the Disney-Fox deal.
  • In July 2018 the Commission imposed fines on the Federation of Gujarat State Chemists and Druggists Association, the Amdavad Chemist Association, the Surat Chemists and Druggists Association, the Chemists and Druggists Association of Baroda, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Hetero Healthcare Ltd, Divine Saviour and their staff and officers for breaches of the Competition Act 2002 by requiring No Objection Certificates before appointing stockists.
  • In May 2019, Umar Javeed, Sukarma Thapar, Aaqib Javeed vs. Google LLC & Ors. the commission ordered an antitrust probe against Google for abusing its dominant position with Android to block market rivals. In its Prima Facie opinion the commission held, "Mandatory Pre-installation of entire Google Mobile Services (GMS) suite under Mobile application distribution agreements MADA amounts to imposition of unfair condition on the device manufacturers. Leveraging of Google's dominance in Google Play Store to protect relevant markets such as online general search in contravention of Section 4(2)(e) of the Competition Act 2002".
  • In June 2019, CCI issued letters to handset makers seeking details of terms and conditions of their agreement with Google. This is to ascertain if Google imposed any restrictions on them for using the company's apps in the past 8 years from 2011.
  • In December 2021, CCI took a step back from approving Amazon's investment in a Future Group company, which had initially received its nod in November 2019. Amazon has been blamed for concealing the scope and complete information of its investment while seeking for the approval.
  • On 31 December 2021, CCI ordered an investigation into Apple Inc. business practices, including the company's enforcement of a proprietary payment system, to be conducted within 60 days.
  • In October 2022, CCI imposed a ₹1,338 crore (US$160 million) penalty on Google for abusing its dominance in the licensing of Android OS for smartphones, app store market for Android, general web search services, non-OS specific mobile web browsers and online video hosting platforms in India. A week later, CCI levied a separate ₹936.44 crore (US$110 million) penalty for abusing its Play Store policies. Additionally, it issued a cease-and-desist order directing Google to modify its policies, including allowing mobile application developers to use third-party payment services on its app store.
  • In November 2024, the CCI fined Facebook parent company Meta Platforms ₹213 crore (US$26 million) over unlawful practices concerning WhatsApp.

See also

References

  1. Ghosh, Saptaparno (9 September 2023). "The Competition Commission's proposed regulations on merger thresholds | Explained". The Hindu. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 1 October 2024.
  2. "CCI formation". CCI. Retrieved 4 January 2013.
  3. "CCI through the eyes of the media: Doing well!". MoneyControl.com. 18 September 2012. Retrieved 4 January 2013.
  4. "In fact: How India learnt to promote, and regulate, competition". Retrieved 2 March 2017.
  5. ^ "The Competition Act – Act No. 12 of 2003" (PDF). Competition Commission of India. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 June 2012. Retrieved 10 October 2012.
  6. admin (3 August 2015). "International Cooperation". Competition Commission of India,Government of India. Retrieved 22 July 2021.
  7. "CCI – Organogram". Competition Commission of India. Retrieved 12 October 2013.
  8. Kalra, Aditya (19 September 2023). "India names ex-government official, former WhatsApp exec as new antitrust members, sources say". Reuters. Retrieved 19 September 2023.
  9. Venkatesh, Mahua (15 August 2013). "Competition panel to probe hoarding, onion price rigging". Hindustan Times (New Delhi ed.). Archived from the original on 16 August 2013. Retrieved 16 August 2013.
  10. "Competition Commission of India imposes Rs 6,307 crore penalty on 11 cement companies". Business Standard. 26 June 2012. Retrieved 4 January 2013.
  11. ^ "Competition Commission of India modifies DLF-buyer agreements". Economic Times. 4 January 2013. Retrieved 4 January 2013.
  12. ^ "CCI ruling on DLF: Changing the builder-buyer equation?". Money Control. 4 January 2013. Retrieved 4 January 2013.
  13. "SS-Barmi-v-BCCI". 8 February 2013. Retrieved 8 February 2013.
  14. "Competition watchdog slaps Rs.52.24 crore fine on BCCI". Live Mint. 8 February 2013. Retrieved 8 February 2013.
  15. "CCI imposes a fine of Rs. 1 Crore upon Google for failure to supply information/ documents in the investigations". PIB. 27 March 2014. Retrieved 1 April 2014.
  16. "Competition panel fines 14 car makers Rs 2,554 crore". LiveMint. 25 August 2014. Retrieved 14 November 2018.
  17. "Cartelisation: CCI imposes Rs 258 crore fine on Jet Airways, IndiGo, SpiceJet". 18 November 2015. Retrieved 12 November 2016 – via Financial Express.
  18. Malvania, Urvi (12 August 2018). "Fox-Disney deal: CCI approves takeover of Murdoch's company in India". Smart Investor. Retrieved 18 August 2018.
  19. "CCI fines chemist and druggist associations and pharma companies". Lexology. 3 January 2019. Archived from the original on 12 February 2019. Retrieved 11 February 2019.
  20. ^ Javeed, Umar (2021). "Data and Competition Law: Introducing Data As Non-Monetary Consideration and Competition Concerns in Data-Driven Online Platforms". SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3788178. ISSN 1556-5068. S2CID 233912862.
  21. Aulakh, Gulveen (20 June 2019). "CCI asks handset companies for info on agreements with Google". The Economic Times. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
  22. Bureau, The Hindu (17 December 2021). "CCI slaps ₹200 crore fine on Amazon, freezes Future deal". The Hindu. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 18 December 2021. {{cite news}}: |last= has generic name (help)
  23. Singh, Manish (31 December 2021). "India antitrust watchdog orders investigation into Apple's business practices". TechCrunch. Retrieved 2 January 2022.
  24. "CCI slaps Rs 936-cr penalty on Google for abusing its dominant market position". The Indian Express. 26 October 2022.
  25. SN, Vikas (25 October 2022). "CCI imposes Rs 936.44 crore fine on Google for abusing its dominance on Play Store policies". Network18 Group.
  26. "India restricts WhatsApp sharing data with other Meta entities, imposes $25.4 mln fine". Reuters. 18 November 2024. Retrieved 18 November 2024.

External links

Indian commissions
Permanent
Ad hoc
Categories: