01
Merger Control
Assessment of notifiability, preparation of the combination filing, and engagement with the Competition Commission through approval, including the deal value threshold introduced by the 2023 amendment.
We advise on the full reach of Indian competition law, clearing transactions through the Competition Commission, defending conduct that is alleged to abuse dominance or restrain competition, and building the compliance that keeps a business on the right side of the line before a regulator ever asks.
A competition mandate spans the transaction and the conduct that follows it. The filing clears the deal, the compliance prevents the complaint, and the defence answers the investigation when one comes.
Assessment of notifiability, preparation of the combination filing, and engagement with the Competition Commission through approval, including the deal value threshold introduced by the 2023 amendment.
Advice and defence on conduct alleged to abuse a dominant position, predatory pricing, exclusivity, refusal to deal and tying, assessed by reference to the relevant market and effect.
Review of horizontal and vertical arrangements, including resale price maintenance, exclusive supply and the bid and price coordination that the Act treats most seriously.
Cartel risk assessment, internal investigation and the leniency application that can reduce penalty for a party that comes forward, where the facts support it.
Representation through the Director General investigation and the Commission proceedings that follow, from the information to the final order.
Competition compliance policies, training and audit, and the internal controls that keep commercial teams inside the line in their day to day dealings.
Each stage builds on the last. The market assessment frames the filing or the defence, the engagement carries it through the Commission, and the appeal preserves the questions of law for the Tribunal.
Define the relevant product and geographic market, the position in it, and the theory of harm in play.
Prepare the combination notification, or the response to an information or investigation, on the right footing.
Carry the matter through the Director General and the Commission, with the data and the economic case.
Secure approval, a settlement or commitment, or contest the final order on the merits.
Take or defend an appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal and onward where a question of law remains.
Every competition mandate is read through three lenses at once. The market analysis has to be technically sound, the commercial logic of the conduct or the deal has to be clear, and the legal position has to hold when the Commission tests it.
We define the relevant product and geographic market and assess position and effect on the evidence, because the economics of market definition decide most competition questions before the law is even argued.
We read the transaction or the conduct in its commercial context, why the deal makes sense, why the pricing or the exclusivity exists, so the business rationale is on the record before a theory of harm is built around it.
We carry the matter through notification, investigation and order under the Competition Act, 2002, and preserve the questions of law for the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal and beyond.
Almost every competition question is decided by the definition of the relevant market. A position that looks dominant in a narrow market is ordinary in a wide one, and conduct that looks abusive in isolation is competitive once the market is properly drawn. We begin with the market, because everything that follows depends on it.
The vocabulary that decides outcomes, set out precisely, not loosely.
A merger, amalgamation or acquisition that crosses the asset or turnover thresholds in Section 5 of the Competition Act 2002 and requires prior approval of the Competition Commission of India.
Conduct prohibited by Section 4 where an enterprise in a dominant position imposes unfair conditions, predatory prices or denial of market access.
An agreement prohibited by Section 3, including cartels, bid-rigging and price-fixing, presumed to cause appreciable adverse effect on competition.
The notification trigger introduced by the Competition (Amendment) Act 2023 capturing transactions valued above two thousand crore rupees with substantial business operations in India.
The automatic, deemed-approval route for combinations that raise no horizontal, vertical or complementary overlap concerns.
Short, direct, on the record.
A transaction requires notification when it qualifies as a combination and crosses the prescribed asset or turnover thresholds, unless an exemption applies. Since the 2023 amendment, a deal value threshold also brings certain high value transactions into merger control even where the traditional asset and turnover tests are not met. The assessment is fact specific and is best done early, because notifiability affects deal timing and the parties cannot complete a notifiable combination before approval.
Dominance is not a function of market share alone. The Commission defines the relevant product and geographic market, then assesses whether the enterprise can operate independently of competitive forces or affect competitors and consumers in its favour. Factors include market share, the structure of the market, entry barriers, countervailing buyer power and dependence of consumers. A position that appears dominant in a narrowly drawn market may be unremarkable once the market is properly defined, which is why market definition is the first and most important step.
A leniency application is a route by which a party to a cartel can disclose it to the Commission and cooperate, in exchange for a reduction in the penalty that would otherwise apply. The benefit depends on the order in which parties come forward and the value of the evidence provided, so timing matters a great deal. It is only appropriate where there is genuine cartel conduct to disclose, and the decision to apply should follow a careful internal investigation rather than precede it.
Section 3 addresses agreements that cause or are likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition. Horizontal arrangements between competitors that fix prices, limit output, share markets or rig bids are treated most seriously and are presumed to harm competition. Vertical arrangements such as exclusive supply, exclusive distribution and resale price maintenance are assessed on their effect. The label the parties use does not decide the matter. The Commission looks at what the arrangement does to competition.
Appeals from an order of the Competition Commission lie to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, which hears both merger and conduct matters. From the Tribunal, a further appeal lies to the Supreme Court on a question of law. Because the factual and economic record is built before the Commission, the appellate stages turn largely on whether that record was correctly assessed and whether the law was correctly applied to it.
Income tax, transfer pricing, withholding and treaty interpretation
Economic offences, PMLA, SEBI enforcement and internal investigations
Civil, commercial, writ and appellate proceedings across the courts
The strongest outcomes are built into the strategy at the start, not recovered from disputes later.