Concealment of Chinese Origin and Misleading Ads on E-Commerce Wasn’t a Competition Issue; Complaint to Be Dismissed | CCI

Case Details: XYZ v. Woodman Electronics India (P.) Ltd. - [2024] 169 taxmann.com 681 (CCI)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Ms Ravneet Kaur, Chairperson, Anil Agrawal, Ms Sweta Kakkad & Deepak Anurag, Member

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the Informant filed information against the opposite party (OP), engaged in the import and sale of aftermarket Chinese Android head units in India, alleging contravention of provisions of section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.

The Informant alleged that OP was engaged in unfair/anti-competitive behaviour by concealing Country of Origin (COO) on their products, specifically Chinese Android head units sold on its e-commerce website.

It was further alleged that OP used the misleading tagline “India Ka Apna Brand” in its marketing material, on its website, and in its YouTube videos, creating a false impression that the products were of Indian Origin.

The Informant asserted that OP’s deceptive behaviour had a detrimental impact on consumers and distorted market competition.

It was noted that the car stereo market was very competitive, with the presence of organised and unorganised players, i.e., Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, Blaupunkt, JBL, and JVC Kenwood, which were reputed global players, and OP appeared to be a relatively new and small player.

CCI Held

The CCI held that the alleged conduct of suppressing details of country of origin and misleading advertisement appeared to be a consumer issue for which remedy lay elsewhere. Therefore, no prima facie case of contravention of the provisions of section 4 of the Act was made out against OP.