WebinarsNew
Deep DiveNew
Explore Business Standard
The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside the NCLAT's June 2022 order which had rejected US e-commerce giant Amazon's appeal against an anti-trust suspension of its investment deal with Future Group. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta also set aside the Competition Commission of India's (CCI) December 17, 2021 order which had levied a Rs 202 crore penalty on Amazon and suspended its deal with Future. "In view of the findings recorded above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgement dated June 13, 2022 passed by the NCLAT and order dated December 17, 2021 passed by the CCI are set aside," Justice Nath said while pronouncing the verdict. The top court said if any amount was deposited or recovered from Amazon pursuant to these orders, the same be refunded within eight weeks. The bench delivered its verdict on a plea filed by Amazon challenging the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) June 2022 order.
Competition Commission seeks to strike the right balance to ensure that it neither stifles innovation with over-regulation nor allows the "winner-takes-all tyranny" of the Big Tech, the watchdog's member Sweta Kakkad said on Wednesday. Speaking at the 17th annual day function of the Competition Commission of India (CCI), she said the rise of artificial intelligence and its impact on pricing, algorithms and digital ecosystems are the newer challenges and that the regulator will deal with them efficiently. CCI has the mandate to keep a tab on unfair business practices and promote fair competition at the market place. "We are at the crossroads where the CCI tries to strike a balance that is just right, which neither stifles innovation with over-regulation nor allows the winner-takes-all tyranny of the Big Tech," she said. CCI has been taking action against unfair business practices in digital markets and has also passed orders against entities for violation of competition norms.
Appellate tribunal NCLAT on Tuesday set aside a Rs 301.6-crore penalty imposed on the Grasim Industries by CCI, directing the fair trade regulator to hear the Aditya Birla Group firm again over its alleged dominance in the viscose staple fibre (VSF) market. The tribunal observed that the CCI did not provide a chance to Grasim Industries to present their arguments, after it differed from the findings of DG, its probe Unit. The Competition Commission of India (CCI) had imposed a penalty on Grasim Industries in March 2020 for allegedly abusing its dominant position with respect to supply of VSF to spinners in India in which it has a dominant position. The order was challenged by Grasim before the NCLAT, which is also an appellate authority over CCI, which asked the regulator to hear afresh. A two-member National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) bench said the CCI itself has "differed from findings of the DG", its probe unit, regarding their directions for disclosure of ...