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...
Fast Track Call Cab Pvt. Ltd. Vs ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Competition Commission of India) Brief Background of the Case The present case is a dispute between Ola (ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd.), an app-based taxi aggregator, and two radio taxi service providers (Fast Track Call Cab Pvt. Ltd.). The informants essentially accused the company of abusing […]
(1) This Act may be called the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2023. (2) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint:
SC in Excel Crop Care ruled that relevant turnover of company, rather than Total turnover, should be used to determine punishment to be imposed on firms using anti-competitive techniques.
Supreme Court held that as the appeal is pending before NCLAT, this court is desisting from entering a finding on the merits of the rival submissions which have been urged on behalf of the contesting parties.
Explore the Google vs CCI case on Abuse of Dominant Position under Section 4(2)(a)(i) of the Competition Act, 2002. Understand how Google’s practices limited competition, entry barriers created, and the penalties imposed.
It is also worth noting that Competition Commission of India (CCI) imposed a monetary penalty of Rs. 1337.76 crore on Google INC for anti-competitive practices in relation to Android mobile devices, as decided in Mr. Umar Javeed and Others Vs. Google LLC and Another
Delhi High Court directed 10% of the penalty amount imposed by the Competition Commission of India, the recovery of the remaining 90% of the penalty amount would remain stayed.
CBIC notifies Competition Commission of India to examine whether input tax credits availed by any registered person or the reduction in the tax rate have actually resulted in a commensurate reduction in the price of the goods or services or both supplied by him vide Notification No. 23/2022 – Central Tax Dated 23rd November, 2022. MINISTRY […]
XYZ (Confidential) Vs Alphabet Inc. (Competition Commission of India) CCI imposes monetary penalty of Rs. 936.44 crore on Google for anti-competitive practices in relation to its Play Store policies The Competition Commission of India (CCI) today imposed a penalty of Rs. 936.44 crore on Google for abusing its dominant position with respect to its Play Store […]
CCI held that all price differentiations may not be discriminatory, more so when same is based on reasonable classification of consumers to which they are offered.
