Competition Commission of India Vs Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court held that Schott (principal domestic manufacturer) offering volume-based discounts doesn’t constitute abuse of dominance under section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.
Facts- The proceedings have their genesis in an information lodged on 25 May 2010 by Kapoor Glass under Section 19 of the Act. Kapoor Glass alleged that Schott India, then the principal domestic manufacturer of neutral USP-I borosilicate glass tubing, had abused its dominant position by offering exclusionary volume-based discounts, imposing discriminatory contractual terms, and, on occasions, refusing supply.
These statutory appeals, preferred u/s. 53T of the Act, challenge a common order dated 2 April 2014 passed by the Competition Appellate Tribunal in Appeal Nos. 91 and 92 of 2012. Civil Appeal No. 5843 of 2014 has been filed by the Competition Commission of India. Civil Appeal No. 9998 of 2014 has been filed by Kapoor Glass India Pvt. Ltd. In both the matters, Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd. is the contesting respondent.
Conclusion- Held that the slabbed target-rebate scheme employs a neutral, volume-based criterion applicable to all purchasers alike; is objectively justified by demonstrable efficiency considerations; and has not been shown to restrict rival output, limit imports or distort downstream prices. The charge of abuse under clauses (a) or (b) of Section 4(2) of the Act fails.
