In August, the CCI recalled an antitrust report on Apple.
According to a document, India’s antitrust body has recalled its investigation report on Walmart’s Flipkart, an online retailer, for violating competition laws. This is the second such action since the revocation of a report on Apple in August.
The report, which found Flipkart, some of its sellers, and smartphone players in violation of competition laws, contained commercial secrets that should have been redacted, according to a September Reuters report that China’s Xiaomi had complained to the Competition Commission of India (CCI).
According to two sources and an internal CCI document dated October 1 that Reuters obtained on Tuesday, the watchdog has directed recipients of the Flipkart report to destroy it and provide an undertaking to that effect in order to prevent further distribution.The watchdog has instructed recipients of the Flipkart report to destroy it and provide an undertaking to that effect in order to prevent further distribution, according to two sources and an internal CCI document dated October 1 that Reuters obtained on Tuesday.
Xiaomi argued the report contained its model-wise sales, which are sensitive information.
The CCI document noted some data and information was “inadvertently” included in the report and provided the parties involved with a new report, though it did not spell out what changes it was making.
Xiaomi declined to comment, while the CCI and Flipkart did not respond to Reuters’ queries.
In August, the CCI recalled an antitrust report on Apple after the company complained commercial secrets were disclosed to some of the parties involved.
The CCI discovered, in a protracted investigation that began in 2020, that Flipkart and its e-commerce competitor Amazon prioritised certain listings and gave preference to specific sellers. They also conspired with companies such as Xiaomi, Samsung, and Vivo to launch phones exclusively on their websites.
Much of the investigation process, however, remains on hold after Vivo and some online sellers of the two e-commerce companies challenged their inclusion in the probe and obtained court injunctions.