{"id":105060,"date":"2025-04-28T13:55:17","date_gmt":"2025-04-28T13:55:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=comparative_guide&#038;p=105060"},"modified":"2025-08-14T14:29:24","modified_gmt":"2025-08-14T14:29:24","slug":"india-cartels","status":"publish","type":"comparative_guide","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/chapter\/india-cartels\/","title":{"rendered":"India: Cartels"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-105060","comparative_guide","type-comparative_guide","status-publish","hentry","guides-cartels","jurisdictions-india"],"acf":[],"appp":{"post_list":{"below_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">P&amp;A Law Offices<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2025\/04\/PA-Law-Offices-Logo.png\"\/><\/span><\/div>"},"post_detail":{"above_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">P&amp;A Law Offices<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2025\/04\/PA-Law-Offices-Logo.png\"\/><\/span><\/div>","below_title":"<span class=\"guide-intro\">This country specific Q&amp;A provides an overview of Cartels laws and regulations applicable in India<\/span><div class=\"guide-content\"><div class=\"filter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t<input type=\"text\" placeholder=\"Search questions and answers...\" class=\"filter-container__search-field\">\r\n\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<ol class=\"custom-counter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the relevant legislative framework?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In India, the Competition Act, 2002, as amended (\u2018<u>Competition Ac<\/u>t\u2019), and several implementing regulations, provide the legislative framework for antitrust regulation and enforcement. The Competition Commission of India (\u201c<u>CCI<\/u>\u201d) is the nodal authority for the enforcement of the Competition Act.\u00a0 Given India\u2019s common law foundation, judicial interpretations and case laws also supplement this competition enforcement regime.<\/p>\n<p>Section 3 of the Competition Act prohibits anti-competitive agreements, which includes cartels. Notably, the Competition Act defines an \u2018agreement\u2019 broadly to include unwritten arrangements, understandings and concerted practices. Cartels (which the Competition Act defines as agreements, arrangements, understanding or concerted action amongst competitors to fix prices or production quantities or allocate markets or customers or manipulate bids) are presumed to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition (\u201c<u>AAEC<\/u>\u201d) and are considered as void. The Competition Act recognizes an exception for efficiency enhancing joint ventures. However, this exception remains untested to date.<\/p>\n<p>There are no industry specific\/sector specific exemptions from the cartel prohibition. Prior to 3 July 2021, vessel sharing agreements in the liner shipping industry were excluded from the general prohibition on anti-competitive agreements, including the prohibition on cartels. However, this exemption has not been renewed.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">To establish an infringement, does there need to have been an effect on the market?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under the Competition Act, cartels are presumed to cause an AAEC in India. As a result, once the CCI establishes the existence of a cartel between\/among competitors, the CCI is not required to prove that the cartel caused an AAEC in India. However, this presumption may be rebutted based on specific evidence that could demonstrate that the anti-competitive agreement has resulted in benefits to consumers,\u00a0improvements in the production or distribution, or\u00a0promotion of technical\/scientific\/economic development, giving rise to benefits that outweigh any competitive harm.<\/p>\n<p>In our experience, it is very difficult to rebut the presumption of AAEC. To date, there has been only one (1) case where the presumption has been rebutted based on social considerations and the nature of the market, in which there were only three (3) large buyers, a few suppliers who, in turn, \u00a0did not have any option but to sell their products to these buyers, the buyer (in question) exercised control over the prices of the cylinders that were supplied by the suppliers under various tenders, it was in the interest of the buyers that they place orders with multiple suppliers to prevent them from exiting the business, and the product in question was necessary to store cooking gas &#8211; \u00a0an essential commodity with prices being regulated by the Government.<sup>1<\/sup><\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">1<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Civil Appeal No. 4280 of 2014, <em>Rajasthan Cylinders and Containers vs Union of India and Another<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does the law apply to conduct that occurs outside the jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Competition Act applies to any anti-competitive conduct occurring outside India if it \u00a0causes or is likely to cause AAEC in India. Notably, the CCI has issued three (3) decisions finding cross-border cartels involving enterprises engaged in business in electric power steering systems,<sup>2<\/sup> industrial and automotive bearings<sup>3<\/sup> and maritime motor vehicle transport services.<sup>4<\/sup>\u00a0In each of these cases, the CCI found that although the cartels were formed outside India, they caused an AAEC in India.<\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">2<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Moto Case No. 07(1) of 2014, <em>In Re: Cartelisation in the supply of Electric Power Steering Systems (EPS Systems).<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">3<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Moto Case No. 07(2) of 2014, <em>In Re: Cartelisation in the supply of Bearings (Automotive and Industrial)<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">4<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> <\/span><\/p>\n<p>Suo Moto Case No. 10 of 2014, <em>In Re: Cartelisation by Shipping Lines in the matter of provision of Maritime Motor Vehicle Transport Services to the Original Equipment Manufacturers<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Which authorities can investigate cartels?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The CCI is the nodal authority for the enforcement of the Competition Act, including the prohibition against cartels. Once the CCI forms a <em>prima facie<\/em> opinion that a matter requires an investigation, the CCI directs the Office of Director General (\u201c<u>DG<\/u>\u201d) to conduct the investigation. The DG\u2019s powers have been discussed below.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How do authorities typically learn of the existence of a potential cartel and to what extent do they have discretion over the cases that they open?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The CCI typically finds out about the existence of a potential cartel on the basis of a complaint filed by a private party (referred to as \u201can information\u201d under the Competition Act).\u00a0 The CCI may also learn about the existence of a potential cartel from a reference made by the central government or the state governments or a statutory authority or from an application seeking the benefit of lesser penalty (i.e., a leniency application). Sometimes, \u00a0the CCI may also initiate a <em>suo motu<\/em> investigation based on the information available to it. In each case, the CCI may not require an investigation unless it forms a <em>prima facie<\/em> opinion as to whether the matter would require an investigation based on the materials available with the CCI. This essentially means that the CCI must adopt a formal decision containing its prima <em>facie opinion<\/em> and direct the DG to initiate an investigation. To date, the CCI has dealt with fifty- two (52) cartel cases. In twenty-five (25) of these cases, the CCI initiated the investigation on the basis of an information filed before it; in nine (9) cases, the CCI initiated investigation on the basis of reference made by government\/statutory authorities; in ten (10) cases, the CCI initiated the investigation suo moto; in eight (8) cases, the CCI learnt of the cartel on the basis of leniency applications.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the key steps in a cartel investigation?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Key steps in a cartel investigation are as follows:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"padding-left: 0\" type=\"i\">\n<li><strong><em>Formation of prima facie opinion:<\/em><\/strong> The CCI scrutinises material available with it to assess whether or not there exists a <em>prima facie<\/em> case that merits an investigation. If the CCI is of the view that there exists a <em>prima facie<\/em> case, then it directs the DG to conduct an investigation into the matter.<\/li>\n<li><strong><em>Investigation by the DG:<\/em><\/strong> The DG has wide ranging investigation powers (discussed below). Following the CCI\u2019s direction, the DG conducts the investigation and submits the investigation report to the CCI. Notably, the DG has some flexibility in the scope of the investigation within the parameters established in the CCI\u2019s direction.<\/li>\n<li><strong><em>Proceedings before the CCI following the conclusion of the DG\u2019s investigation<\/em><\/strong>: The CCI considers the investigation report submitted by the DG. If the CCI finds that the investigation report is lacking in material aspects, then the CCI may direct the DG to further investigate the facts. If the CCI is satisfied with the DG\u2019s investigation, then the CCI provides a copy of the investigation report to the affected parties and invites their objections and suggestions to the DG\u2019s findings. The CCI then proceeds to pass a final order in the matter after providing a hearing to the parties. If the CCI finds a contravention, it may impose penalties and pass any other order it deems fit which, among other things, includes a direction to cease and desist the cartel activity.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Notably, the Competition Act does not provide a definitive timeline for the completion of the cartel investigation.\u00a0 In our experience, the CCI typically takes 1.5 \u2013 2 years to complete cartel investigations.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the key investigative powers that are available to the relevant authorities?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The DG, the investigation arm of the CCI, has been conferred with wide powers to conduct the investigation. These include:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"padding-left: 0\" type=\"i\">\n<li>summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath;<\/li>\n<li>requiring the discovery and production of documents;<\/li>\n<li>receiving evidence on affidavit;<\/li>\n<li>issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents; and<\/li>\n<li>requisitioning any public record or document or copy of such record or document from any office, subject to provisions of Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (\u201c<u>Evidence Act<\/u>\u201d).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The DG may also conduct dawn raids at the office premises of the enterprise (under investigation) or the residences of the key executives of the said enterprise. During these raids, the DG may seize digital copies of data stored in servers, mobile phones, laptops, desktops, etc., including emails and whatsapp messages, and record statements of the key executives. These raids frequently extend beyond 24 hours.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">On what grounds can legal privilege be invoked to withhold the production of certain documents in the context of a request by the relevant authorities?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Legal privilege in a cartel investigation is governed by the provisions of the Evidence Act. Privilege is attached to the advice rendered by the advocates and external legal counsels to their client(s). While communications with external legal counsels benefit from legal privilege to the extent the communications contain legal advice, there is no clarity on whether legal privilege would extend to advice rendered by an in-house counsel or the communications with the in-house counsel relating to legal advice. This is because different high courts have rendered conflicting decisions and observations and the Indian Supreme Court is yet to render a judgment on the scope of legal privilege.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the conditions for a granting of full immunity? What evidence does the applicant need to provide? Is a formal admission required?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The CCI can impose a lesser penalty on a cartel participant (including up to a 100% reduction of penalties) if the applicant seeking the benefit of lesser penalty (i.e., leniency) provides vital, true, and full disclosure of information\/evidence that could enable the CCI to (i) form a <em>prima facie<\/em> opinion as regards the existence of the cartel (in cases where the CCI learns of the cartel through the lesser penalty application), or (ii) establish a contravention of Section 3 of the Competition Act (in cases where the DG\u2019s investigation is underway).<\/p>\n<p>The conditions for the grant of lesser penalty include the leniency applicant having to: cease participation in the cartel (unless otherwise directed by the CCI), fully cooperate with the DG and the CCI, ensure that it does not conceal, destroy, manipulate or remove any relevant documents that may help establish the existence of the cartel (\u201c<u>Leniency Conditions<\/u>\u201d).<\/p>\n<p>The leniency application should provide vital, true and full disclosure of information\/evidence relating to an alleged cartel, which would tantamount to an admission that it has engaged in cartelisation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What level of leniency, if any, is available to subsequent applicants and what are the eligibility conditions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The leniency framework in India provides for a \u2018first past the post\u2019 mechanism where only the first applicant is allowed up to 100% reduction in penalty. Second and subsequent applicants are allowed up to 50% and up to 30%, respectively. All leniency applicants are expected to comply with the Leniency Conditions in order to avail the benefit of lesser penalties. To qualify for lower penalties, however, subsequent applicants must disclose additional valuable information that was previously not known to the CCI, or such information which adds significant value to the evidence already in possession with the DG\/CCI, i.e., the evidence should enhance the ability of the CCI or the DG to establish the cartel.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are markers available and, if so, in what circumstances?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, the leniency regime in India operates on the basis of \u2018priority status\u2019 or marker. It is the position marked by the CCI in the queue of applicants in a particular case. Priority status or marker is based on the following: (i) the stage at which the applicant comes forward with the disclosure; (ii) the evidence already in possession of the CCI; (iii) the quality of the information provided by the applicant; and (iv) the entire facts and circumstances of the case.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is required of immunity\/leniency applicants in terms of ongoing cooperation with the relevant authorities?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The leniency applicant is required to provide full, true, continuous, expeditious and genuine co-operation to the DG\/ CCI during the investigation. The level of co-operation extended by the leniency applicant is one of the key factors determining the quantum of penalty reductions. Notably, a finding of a lack of continuous cooperation by the leniency applicant may lead to removal from the marker.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does the grant of immunity\/leniency extend to immunity from criminal prosecution (if any) for current\/former employees and directors?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In India, a cartel investigation is a civil matter, and does not give rise to criminal prosecution under the Competition Act. Current and former employees of the applicant could benefit from the leniency regime.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there an \u2018amnesty plus\u2019 programme available in respect of evidence provided to prove additional infringements?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, the leniency plus regime was introduced in the year 2023. It ensures that the applicant gets a priority status in respect of a new cartel (disclosed by the applicant) while ensuring reduction in the quantum of penalties for involvement in the first cartel investigation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does the investigating authority have the ability to enter into a settlement agreement or plea bargain and, if so, what is the process for doing so?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No. In India, settlement and settlement proceedings are not available to cartel participants.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the key pros and cons for a party that is considering entering into settlement?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Not applicable. See above.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the nature and extent of any cooperation with other investigating authorities, including from other jurisdictions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under the Competition Act, if any statutory authority (other than the CCI) is investigating a matter involving an interpretation of the Competition Act, such authority may make a reference to the CCI seeking its opinion on the issue. Conversely, if during the course of an inquiry under the Competition Act, the CCI finds that an issue falls withing the jurisdiction and expertise of another statutory authority, then the CCI may make a reference to the concerned statutory authority seeking its opinion on the issue.<\/p>\n<p>Where the facts discovered by the CCI or the DG involve matters that fall within the jurisdiction of the Enforcement Directorate (\u201c<u>ED<\/u>\u201d), which is the authority responsible for investigating money laundering and violations of the foreign investment laws, the CCI is required to share information with the ED. Likewise, the ED may also choose to cooperate with the CCI and provide it with the relevant information.<\/p>\n<p>The CCI also has the powers to enter into memorandums of understanding with competition authorities in other jurisdictions to ensure cooperation in respect of ongoing investigations, capacity building, networking and global best practices. Over the years, the CCI has entered into memorandums of understanding with the Egyptian Competition Authority, Competition Commissioner of Mauritius, Japan Fair Trade Commission, Administrative Council for Economic Defense of Brazil, the BRICS countries, Competition Bureau Canada, The European Commission (DG, Competition), the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Federal Antimonopoly Service (Russia).<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the potential civil and criminal sanctions if cartel activity is established?  How often are civil sanctions and\/ or criminal penalties imposed in practice following a finding of an infringement?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There are no criminal sanctions for cartel activities under the Competition Act. If the CCI finds an infringement of the Competition Act, it usually imposes a monetary penalty (of up to three times the profit for each year during the continuance of such an agreement or 10% of the global turnover for each year of the continuance of such agreement, whichever is higher). \u00a0The CCI may also impose other civil sanctions such as: (i) requiring the parties to cease and desist from cartelisation; (ii) modifying agreements to the extent necessary; (iii) behavioural directions; and (iv) any other directions that the CCI deems fit. \u00a0The CCI has found contravention and issued final decisions in fifty-two (52) cases relating to cartels, of which penalties have been imposed in thirty-eight (38) cases.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What factors are taken into account when the fine is set?  Does the existence of an effective corporate compliance strategy impact the determination of the fine?  In practice, what is the maximum level of fines that has been imposed in the case of recent domestic and international cartels?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p><strong><em>Factors taken into consideration while imposing penalty <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Competition Act provides that the CCI may impose a penalty up to 10% of the average global turnover of the three preceding financial years of an enterprise. In cartel cases, the CCI is also empowered to impose penalty of up to three times the profit generated during the infringement period or 10% of the turnover\/income for each year of the infringing period upon each producer, seller, distributor, trader or service provider in the cartel.<\/p>\n<p>The Competition Commission of India (Determination of Monetary Penalty) Guidelines, 2024 (\u201c<u>Penalty Guidelines<\/u>\u201d) provide guidance on the factors that may be considered by the CCI when deciding on the penalty amount. The Penalty Guidelines make it clear that the CCI will consider the relevant turnover while determining the quantum of penalties. The CCI, however, exercises discretion while determining the quantum of penalties and may consider aggravating factors and mitigating factors discussed below.<\/p>\n<p>The aggravating factors include duration of contravention, role of the enterprise in orchestrating the infringing conduct, recourse to coercive or retaliatory measures on other enterprises to participate in the conduct and repeated contraventions. Mitigating factors include admission of contravention<sup>5<\/sup> and the stage of admission,<sup>6<\/sup> evidence provided by the enterprise establishing that its involvement was limited, extent of cooperation,<sup>7<\/sup> voluntary termination of alleged anti-competitive conduct,<sup>8<\/sup> and implementation of a competition compliance programme.<sup>9<\/sup>. The CCI, in its decisional practice, has, among other things, considered effective corporate compliance programmes as a mitigating factor while determining the quantum of penalties. As mitigating factors, the CCI has also considered factors such as the malicious intent of the informant,<sup>10<\/sup> exigent economic circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic,<sup>11<\/sup> size of the enterprise (particularly whether the enterprise concerned is a micro, small or medium enterprise)<sup>12<\/sup> and low or no turnover.<sup>13<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>The highest penalty imposed by the CCI in a cartel investigation is INR 87.1 billion (net of leniency reduction).<sup>14<\/sup> In a cross-border cartel case, INR 0.65 billion has been the highest penalty imposed to date.<sup>15<\/sup><\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">5<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Case No. 24 of 2017, <em>In r<\/em><em>e:<\/em> <em>Federation of Corrugated Box Manufacturers of India, Andhra Pradesh Corrugated Box Manufacturers Association, Uttar Pradesh Corrugated Box Manufacturers Association.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">6<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Motu Case No. 10 of 2014, <em>In r<\/em><em>e: Cartelisation by Shipping Lines in the matter of provision of Maritime Motor Vehicle Transport Services to the Original Equipment Manufacturers.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">7<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Ibid.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">8<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Case No. 02 0f 2020, <em>In re: Mr. Rakesh Khare Chief Materials Manager (Stores), Eastern Railway.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">9<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Motu Case No. 10 of 2014, <em>In r<\/em><em>e: Cartelisation by Shipping Lines in the matter of provision of Maritime Motor Vehicle Transport Services to the Original Equipment Manufacturers.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">10<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Case No. 41 of 2023, <em>In re: Vijay Halder and Chetan Ramesh and others.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">11<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Case No. 24 of 2017, <em>In re: Federation of Corrugated Box Manufacturers of India, Andhra Pradesh Corrugated Box Manufacturers Association, Uttar Pradesh Corrugated Box Manufacturers Association.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">12<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Motu Case No. 20 of 2020, <em>In re: Alleged anti-competitive conduct by various bidders in supply and installation of signages at specified locations of State Bank of India across India.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">13<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Case No. 02 0f 2020, <em>In re: Mr. Rakesh Khare Chief Materials Manager (Stores), Eastern Railway.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">14<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Motu Case No. 06 of 2017, <em>In Re: Alleged anti-competitive conduct in the Beer Market in India.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">15<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Motu Case No. 10 of 2014, <em>In Re: Cartelisation by Shipping Lines in the matter of provision of Maritime Motor Vehicle Transport Services to the Original Equipment Manufacturers.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are parent companies presumed to be jointly and severally liable with an infringing subsidiary?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under the Competition Act, there is no presumption of the liability of parent companies for contravention by subsidiaries. However, if the CCI finds that the enterprise responsible for the contravention is a member of a group, and other members of such group are also responsible for, or have contributed to the contravention, then the CCI may also impose penalty on such group members. Thus, the CCI can attribute liability to group companies depending on their role and involvement in the cartelisation conduct.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are private actions and\/or class actions available for infringement of the cartel rules?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under the Competition Act, any enterprise or person can make an application to the Appellate Tribunal, i.e. National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (\u201c<u>NCLAT<\/u>\u201d), to claim compensation for any loss or damage suffered as a result of an infringement of the substantive \u201cconduct-prohibition\u201d provisions of the Competition Act, such as the prohibition on cartels. Although the compensation claims can be filed based upon the\u00a0 CCI\u2019s decision itself, in practice, compensation claims are heard by the NCLAT only after the CCI\u2019s decision attains finality either after being upheld by the Supreme Court in appellate proceedings on the merits or where the CCI\u2019s decision has not been challenged on the merits. The Competition Act also provides that where loss has been suffered by numerous persons having the same interest, one person may make such application on behalf of all the interested parties suffering loss.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What type of damages can be recovered by claimants and how are they quantified?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>N\/A<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">On what grounds can a decision of the relevant authority be appealed?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The decision of the CCI or the NCLAT (rendered on appeal) may be challenged, <em>inter alia<\/em>, questioning the findings of fact, application of law and\/or the quantum of penalties. Any procedural lapses by the CCI may be challenged before the high courts in the exercise of their writ jurisdiction.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the process for filing an appeal?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Any person aggrieved by the CCI\u2019s decision can file an appeal before the NCLAT, within a period of sixty (60) days from the receipt of the CCI\u2019s decision. In cases where the appeal is being filed by the party upon whom penalty has been imposed, the party also has to deposit 25% of that amount.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are some recent notable cartel cases (limited to one or two key examples, with a very short summary of the facts, decision and sanctions\/level of fine)?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In a notable recent development in 2024, the CCI has passed a single final order relating to a cartel and reversed its earlier 2018 decision relating to the same cartel.\u00a0 Specifically, in 2018,the CCI imposed penalties on sugar mills and their associations in a case involving bid rigging.<sup>16<\/sup>\u00a0In 2024, following a remand order issued by the NCLAT directing the CCI to reconsider the case, \u00a0the CCI after hearing the opposite parties (i.e., sugar mills) and reiterating its decisional practice that mere price parallelism cannot be the sole criteria to establish a cartel (and that parallel pricing must be accompanied by \u201cplus factors\u201d which would establish that the alleged conduct is conscious and not the result of independent business decisions), the CCI closed the case based up on lack of sufficient evidence.<\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">16<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Case No. 21\/2013, 29\/2013, 36\/2013, 47\/2013, 48\/2013, 49\/2013, <em>India Glycols Limited Vs. Indian Sugar Mills Association &amp; Ester India Chemicals Limited Vs. Bajaj Hindusthan Limited &amp; Jubilant Life Sciences Limited Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited &amp; A B Sugars Limited Vs. Indian Sugar Mills Association &amp; Wave Distilleries and Breweries Limited Vs. Indian Sugar Mills Association &amp; Lords Distillery Limited Vs. Indian Sugar Mills Association &amp; Others.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the key recent trends (e.g. in terms of fines, sectors under investigation, any novel areas of investigation, applications for leniency, approach to settlement, number of appeals, impact of hybrid working in enforcement practice \u2013 e.g. dawn raids of domestic premises, \u2018hybrid\u2019 in-person\/virtual dawn raids, access to personal devices, etc.)??<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p><strong><em>i. Penalties:<\/em><\/strong> The CCI imposed penalties on cartel participants based upon total turnover and the NCLAT refused to interfere on appeal. In a case involving bid rigging of tenders relating to soil testing, the CCI imposed a penalty at 5% of the average turnover for the three (3) financial years.<sup>17<\/sup> On appeal, the NCLAT declined to interfere and noted that since the parties were new businesses, taking into account total turnover for determining the quantum of penalties was appropriate.<sup>18<\/sup>\u00a0In another case involving bid rigging of a tender issued by SBI Infra Management Solutions Private Limited in relation to installation of signages at specific branches of State Bank of India (\u201c<u>Signage Cartel<\/u>\u201d), the NCLAT refused to interfere in the CCI\u2019s determination of penalties based on total turnover. The CCI noted that the cartel activity (i.e., installation of signage) was the principal business activity and aided in the allied business activities of the company and, therefore, relevant turnover on the basis of segmentation will not be reflective of the actual scope of business conducted by the appellant.<sup>19<\/sup> The NCLAT also observed that the CCI had already adopted a lenient view for determining the quantum of penalties as it considered mitigating factors, such as the size of the tenders and the parties being micro small and medium enterprises.<sup>20<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>There are two instances where the NCLAT reduced the penalties imposed by the CCI. These cases arose from the CCI\u2019s decision in the cartels involving dry cell batteries<sup>21<\/sup> and zinc carbon dry cell batteries.<sup>22<\/sup>\u00a0Both these cases emanated from the leniency applications filed by Panasonic Corporation and penalties were imposed by the CCI on the cartel participants. On appeal, the NCLAT reduced the penalties imposed by the CCI on Geep Industries Private Limited (\u201c<u>Geep<\/u>\u201d) and Godrej and Boyce manufacturing Co. Limited\u00a0(\u201c<u>Godrej<\/u>\u201d) after considering the mitigating factors, such as, insignificant market shares in their respective markets, meagre profits of Geep, losses suffered by Godrej and the absence of adequate reasons being given by the CCI for determining the quantum of penalties.<sup>23<\/sup><\/p>\n<p><strong><em>ii. Publication of prima facie order:<\/em><\/strong> The CCI has now commenced publishing the non-confidential version of the <em>prima facie<\/em> orders in cartel cases. To date, the CCI has published four (4) such orders in 2024, thereby, marking a significant departure from its past practice of not disclosing cartel investigations until the issuance of final orders on the merits.<\/p>\n<p><strong><em>iii. Search and seizure operations:<\/em><\/strong> The CCI actively conducted two (2) search and seizure operations on various enterprises engaged in manufacturing alcoholic beverages and several advertising agencies in 2024 and 2025, respectively, while investigating alleged cartel conduct. Notably, the CCI has conducted a majority of its search and seizure operations in cartel investigations. Given the difficulty in obtaining evidence of cartelization and collusive conduct, the CCI is likely to continue search and seizure operations in cartel cases.<\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">17<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Moto Case No. 01 of 2020, <em>In Re: Alleged bid-rigging in E-Tenders invited by the Department of Agriculture, Government of Uttar Pradesh for soil sample testing.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">18<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Competition Appeal (AT) No. 38 of 2022, <em>M\/s Yash Solutions &amp; Others. v. Competition Commission of India.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">19<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Competition Appeal (AT) No. 30 of 2020, <em>Amreesh Neon Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Mr. Manosh Thakkar v. Competition Commission of India.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">20<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> <em>Ibid<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">21<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Motu Case No. 02 of 2017, <em>In Re: Anticompetitive conduct in the Dry-Cell Batteries Market in India.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">22<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Suo Motu Case No. 02 of 2016, <em>In Re: Cartelisation in respect of zinc carbon dry cell batteries market in India.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">23<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\"> Competition Appeal (AT) No. 87 of 2018, <em>Ms.Puhpa M vs Competition Commission of India &amp; Others<\/em>; Competition Appeal (AT) No. 18 of 2019, <em>Godrej &amp; Boyce Manufactuting Co. Ltd vs Competition Commission of India<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the key expected developments over the next 12 months (e.g. imminent statutory changes, procedural changes, upcoming decisions, etc.)?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The amendments to the Competition Act introduced a leniency plus regime whereby a cartel participant can get penalty reduction for disclosing a new cartel. Based on the information available in the public domain, no party has so far availed the benefit of the leniency plus regime. The CCI is also conducting its first ever cartel investigation involving advertising agencies and this investigation involves major players such as Dentsu and GroupM. The CCI\u2019s decision in this case would likely lead to major changes in the media industry since the CCI has reportedly uncovered significant evidence of cartelization.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\r\n<div class=\"word-count-hidden\" style=\"display:none;\">Estimated word count: <span class=\"word-count\">5128<\/span><\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<\/ol>\r\n\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/wp-content\/themes\/twentyseventeen\/src\/jquery\/components\/filter-guides.js\" async><\/script><\/div>"}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide\/105060","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/comparative_guide"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=105060"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}