Corporate Law : The CCI held that dominance alone is insufficient to establish a violation under Section 4. The key takeaway is that actual or pot...
Corporate Law : This case examines whether borrowing costs should be capitalised using full-year borrowings or only those during the eligible peri...
Corporate Law : The Court’s 2025 ruling upheld CCI’s power to impose structural and personal penalties without a second notice, marking a majo...
Corporate Law : India is moving to regulate Big Tech's anti-competitive practices like predatory pricing, self-preferencing, and data misuse. A ne...
Corporate Law : This analysis reveals how exclusive airport retail concession agreements create monopolies, leading to unchecked high prices for p...
Corporate Law : The Competition Commission of India has proposed amendments to address administrative and procedural issues identified during impl...
Corporate Law : The proposed rules establish a comprehensive conduct framework for CCI employees, including integrity, conflict-of-interest contro...
Corporate Law : Parliament was informed that no antitrust or merger cases originated from Jammu and Kashmir during the year. The key takeaway is t...
Corporate Law : Enforcement activity rose with steady antitrust actions and quicker merger disposals, aided by reduced timelines and streamlined p...
Corporate Law : The competition watchdog has initiated further proceedings over widespread flight disruptions, signaling that the matter merits ex...
Corporate Law : CCI held no prima facie violation of Sections 3 or 4 as dominance, collusion, and anti-competitive agreements were not established...
Corporate Law : CCI held evidence did not prove mandatory NOC, PIS approvals or systematic boycott after compliance measures and closed the procee...
Corporate Law : The Commission examined allegations relating to one-sided agreements, rental suppression, and delayed payments in commercial real ...
Corporate Law : The Competition Commission found that truck associations collectively fixed freight charges beyond government-prescribed limits an...
Corporate Law : The dispute centred on whether the airport taxi operator had exclusive control over transportation services. The Commission relied...
Corporate Law : The CCI held that restricting warranty services in India to products bought from authorised distributors was unfair and discrimina...
Corporate Law : Summary of the Competition Commission of India (Determination of Cost of Production) Regulations, 2025. Details key changes, defin...
Corporate Law : The Competition Commission of India (CCI) notifies new regulations for recovering monetary penalties, detailing procedures for dem...
Corporate Law : CCI penalizes Meta ₹213.14 crore for abusing dominance through WhatsApp's 2021 Privacy Policy update. Cease-and-desist orders an...
Corporate Law : Clause (f) of Section 19 of the Competition Amendment Act 2023 comes into effect on 19th September 2024, as per the Ministry of Co...
CCI held no prima facie violation of Sections 3 or 4 as dominance, collusion, and anti-competitive agreements were not established, leading to closure under Section 26(2).
CCI held evidence did not prove mandatory NOC, PIS approvals or systematic boycott after compliance measures and closed the proceedings.
The Commission examined allegations relating to one-sided agreements, rental suppression, and delayed payments in commercial real estate projects. It ruled that no prima facie case of abuse of dominance or anti-competitive conduct was established because dominance itself was not demonstrated.
The Competition Commission found that truck associations collectively fixed freight charges beyond government-prescribed limits and restricted market competition. The ruling directs them to cease such anti-competitive practices.
The dispute centred on whether the airport taxi operator had exclusive control over transportation services. The Commission relied on the licence agreement’s non-exclusivity clause and found no prima facie abuse of dominant position.
The CCI held that dominance alone is insufficient to establish a violation under Section 4. The key takeaway is that actual or potential harm to competition must be demonstrated before abuse can be found.
The Informant alleged unfair subscription cancellation and service deficiencies by an AI platform. The CCI held that the matter was essentially a dispute between the parties and did not raise competition law concerns under Section 4.
The CCI found a prima facie case against restrictive contractual clauses that allegedly prevented participants from joining competing pageants and controlled their professional activities. The matter has been referred to the Director General for investigation.
The Competition Commission of India has proposed amendments to address administrative and procedural issues identified during implementation of the commitment framework. The changes seek to improve certainty, transparency, and efficiency in commitment proceedings.
The CCI held that allegations relating to vehicle permits, GST remittance, and transport rule violations fall outside the scope of competition law. The Commission found no prima facie abuse of dominance under Section 4 of the Competition Act.
