Competition Monthly - March 2026

SUPREME COURT REMANDS FLIPKART CASE TO NCLAT IN APPEAL AGAINST CCI INVESTIGATION

The Supreme Court of India, by its order dated 03 February, 2026, partly allowed the appeal filed by Flipkart India Pvt. Ltd. against the Competition Commission of India (CCI) and set aside the judgment of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) dated 04 March, 2020. The Court remanded the matter to the NCLAT for fresh consideration.

The dispute originated from allegations made by the All India Online Vendors Association (AIOVA) that Flipkart engaged in anti-competitive practices such as preferential treatment to certain sellers, deep discounting, and possible predatory pricing on its e-commerce marketplace. The CCI had earlier dismissed the complaint in 2018, holding that Flipkart was not dominant in the relevant market for online marketplace services due to the presence of competing platforms such as Amazon and other entrants.

On appeal, the NCLAT set aside the CCI’s closure order and directed the Director General to conduct an investigation, relying partly on observations made in income tax proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the NCLAT’s reasoning required reconsideration as it had relied on findings from a tax assessment order that was stated to be subsequently set aside. In the interest of justice, the Court remanded the case to the NCLAT to decide the appeal afresh in light of settled competition law principles, including those laid down in Coal India Ltd. v. CCI.

The Court clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits of the allegations and allowed the parties to raise all contentions before the NCLAT.

CCI FINDS INTEL GUILTY OF ABUSE OF DOMINANCE FOR INDIA-SPECIFIC WARRANTY POLICY

The CCI, by its order dated 12 February 2026, imposed a penalty of INR 27.38 crores on Intel Corporation for abusing its dominant position in the market for boxed microprocessors for desktop PCs in India under Competition Act, 2002 (Act).

The informant (Matrix Info Systems Pvt. Ltd.) alleged that prior to 2016, Intel provided manufacturer warranty in India for microprocessors purchased from its authorised distributors worldwide. However, with effect from 25 April 2016, Intel revised its policy and restricted warranty services in India only to microprocessors purchased from its authorised Indian distributors.

The CCI noted that Intel manufactures a wide range of microprocessors used by leading computer manufacturers such as Acer, Apple, Dell and ASUS and held a significantly higher market share than its closest competitor, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). On this basis, the CCI held Intel to be dominant in the relevant market for boxed microprocessors for desktop PCs in India.

On the issue of abuse, the CCI observed that Intel’s India-specific warranty policy was unfair and discriminatory as similar restrictions were not imposed in several other jurisdictions. The policy compelled Indian resellers and system integrators to procure boxed microprocessors only from Intel’s authorised Indian distributors instead of sourcing them from overseas distribution channels at lower prices.

The CCI also observed that following the change in the warranty policy, sales by Intel’s authorised distributors in India increased to the detriment of parallel importers, thereby resulting in denial of market access to such parallel importers. Basis the above and in consideration of the mitigating factor that Intel had discontinued the impugned warranty policy from April 2024, the CCI imposed a penalty of INR 27.38 crore.

CCI ORDERS INVESTIGATION AGAINST INDIGO FOR ALLEGED ABUSE OF DOMINANCE IN DOMESTIC AIR PASSENGER TRANSPORT

The CCI, by its order dated 04 February 2026, directed the Director General to investigate InterGlobe Aviation Limited (IndiGo) for alleged abuse of dominant position in the market for domestic air passenger transport services in India, in contravention of Sections 4(2)(a)(i) and 4(2)(b)(i) of the Act.

The proceedings originated from an information filed by an individual passenger alleging that IndiGo cancelled scheduled return flights at short notice during widespread operational disruptions in early December 2025 and failed to provide alternate travel arrangements. The informant claimed that passengers were compelled to rebook flights at substantially higher fares, including on flights operated by IndiGo itself, following the cancellations.

IndiGo raised a preliminary objection that the matter fell within the jurisdiction of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) under the Bhartiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024 and the Aircraft Rules, 1937. The CCI rejected this contention, observing that sectoral regulation and competition law operate in distinct but complementary domains and that the existence of regulatory oversight does not oust the jurisdiction of the CCI to examine anti-competitive conduct. Remedies under competition law are directed towards preserving the competitive process, protecting market structure and preventing distortions in the marketplace, which are objectively distinct from sectoral regulation.

For the purposes of analysis, the CCI delineated the relevant market as the “market for domestic air passenger transport services in India”. The CCI noted that IndiGo holds a substantial and sustained market share of around 60–61% in terms of passenger traffic and capacity and operates the largest fleet in the domestic aviation market, indicating a position of dominance.

Regarding the alleged abusive conduct, the CCI observed that large-scale cancellations reportedly affected over three lakh passengers and significantly reduced available capacity in the market. According to the CCI, sudden withdrawal of scheduled services coupled with sharply increased fares could have left consumers with limited alternatives, effectively locking them into higher-priced options. Such conduct, at the prima facie stage, appeared capable of constituting (i) imposition of unfair conditions on consumers, and (ii) restriction of provision of services by creating artificial scarcity in the market.

CCI APPROVES SUMITOMO MITSUI BANKING CORPORATION’S ACQUISITION OF STAKE IN YES BANK

The CCI, by its order, approved the proposed acquisition by Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation (SMBC/ Acquirer) of 20% share capital and voting rights of YES Bank Limited (YES Bank/ Target).

In addition to the proposed acquisition, the Acquirer informed the CCI that it proposes to acquire additional shareholding on a fully diluted basis, either by way of a primary subscription of securities of YES Bank or secondary acquisition from the open market or from the other existing shareholders, which may increase its total shareholding to up to 24.99%.

The CCI observed that SMBC, a Japan-based commercial bank and part of the Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group (SMFG), is engaged in providing various banking services in India including lending, deposit-taking and other financial services. YES Bank is an Indian private sector bank providing a wide range of banking and financial services to retail, MSME and corporate customers.

For the purpose of competition assessment, the CCI examined horizontal overlaps between the activities of the parties in areas such as lending services, loans against securities, digital payment services, deposit-taking services, foreign exchange services, investment banking services, cash management services and insurance distribution in India. The CCI also examined vertical linkages in areas including arranger services for debt private placements, vehicle financing and leasing, and referral services relating to alternate investment funds.

The CCI observed that the combined market share resulting from the proposed combination was between 0–5% in most markets and 5–10% in certain narrower segments such as NEFT services and unsecured loans to individuals, with several other significant competitors present. Accordingly, the CCI concluded that the proposed combination was unlikely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India and approved the transaction.

CCI APPROVES ASIA II TOPCO XIII’S ACQUISITION OF STAKE IN FEDERAL BANK

The CCI, by its order, approved the proposed acquisition by Asia II Topco XIII Pte. Ltd. (Acquirer) of certain warrants of Federal Bank Limited (Target). The proposed transaction relates to the acquisition of warrants pursuant to an Investment Agreement dated 24 October 2025 between the Acquirer (owned and controlled by funds advised or managed by affiliates of Blackstone Inc.) and Federal Bank (private sector commercial bank in India). Upon full exercise of the warrants, the Acquirer will hold 9.99% of the paid-up share capital of Federal Bank on a fully diluted basis and will also have the right to nominate a director to the board of the Target.

For the purpose of competition assessment, the CCI examined horizontal overlaps between the activities of Blackstone’s portfolio entities and the Target in segments such as loans and lending services, distribution of insurance products, and provision and distribution of financial products including AIFs and PMS. The CCI also examined certain vertical linkages in the provision and distribution of life insurance products, PMS and AIFs.

The CCI observed that the combined presence of the Acquirer and the Target in these segments was insignificant (below 5%), and that the markets are characterised by the presence of several other competitors. Accordingly, the CCI concluded that the proposed combination was not likely to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India and approved the transaction.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.