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...
Allegations of collusive bidding and tender manipulation were examined but not substantiated by evidence. The Commission held that procurement conditions were legally permissible. The key takeaway is that absence of proof of agreement defeats cartel claims.
The Commission found no prima facie violation of competition law despite allegations of arbitrary account termination. It held that enforcement of platform policies and appeal mechanisms did not amount to abuse of dominance.
The proposed rules establish a comprehensive conduct framework for CCI employees, including integrity, conflict-of-interest controls, and restrictions on disclosures of confidential information.
The Competition Commission of India held that allegations of airlines jointly fixing cancellation charges were unsupported by evidence of any agreement or concerted action. As a result, no violation of Section 3 of the Competition Act was established and the complaint was dismissed.
The Competition Commission of India held that exclusive agreements between an online movie ticketing platform and cinemas did not lead to market foreclosure. Despite dominance in the online ticketing market, the Commission found no evidence of denial of market access to competitors.
The CCI held that restricting warranty services in India to products bought from authorised distributors was unfair and discriminatory. The policy was found to limit consumer choice and deny market access to parallel importers, leading to a ₹27.38 crore penalty.
Parliament was informed that no antitrust or merger cases originated from Jammu and Kashmir during the year. The key takeaway is that enforcement activity in the region remained nil in 2025.
Enforcement activity rose with steady antitrust actions and quicker merger disposals, aided by reduced timelines and streamlined procedures.
This case examines whether borrowing costs should be capitalised using full-year borrowings or only those during the eligible period. It concludes that the eligible-period approach best aligns with Ind AS 23 and prevents over-capitalisation.
The competition regulator found a prima facie case that large-scale cancellations followed by higher fares may amount to abuse of dominance. A detailed investigation has been ordered to examine unfair pricing and restriction of services.
