Skip to main content

CCI slaps Rs 14.24 lakh penalty on road transporters grouping

The Competition Commission today slapped a fine of Rs 14.24 lakh on All India Motor Transport Congress (AIMTC) and asked the grouping to "cease and desist" from indulging in anti-competitive practices with respect to truck freight rates.

The ruling comes after a detailed probe by the fair trade regulator found that AIMTC, an apex body of road transporters, had uniformly hiked the truck freight rates across the country on account of diesel price hike in 2012.

The association has been penalised for indulging in unfair business practices and also not being able to "explain as to how the said conduct did not foreclose competition".

"...AIMTC through its impugned action has tried to determine the price of freight rates and, as such, such action squarely fell within the presumption raised in...The (Competition) Act," the Competition Commission of India said in an order dated February 16 but released today.

According to the regulator, the members of AIMTC had entered into an anti-competitive agreement to fix prices in respect of freight rates charged by individual truckers.

"Such collusive and concerted practices distorted the market dynamics and led the truckers to increase the prices through the decisions of associations instead of pricing the services through the market forces of demand and supply," CCI noted in the order.

Accordingly, the regulator has imposed a penalty of Rs 14.24 lakh on AIMTC.

It has also directed the body "to cease and desist from indulging in the act/conduct which have been found to be in contravention of the provisions of the Act in this order and in particular it is directed to refrain from issuing any announcements/ directions/ circulars etc to its members which may contravene the provisions of the Act".

The case relates to a complaint filed by Indian Foundation of Transport Research and Training that had alleged that AIMTC has uniformly increased the truck freight by 15 per cent across the country on account of diesel price hike of Rs 5 per litre from September 14, 2012.

Further, it was alleged that AIMTC has a track record of instructing its constituents to jack up freight charges on account of increase in input costs such as diesel price.

A cease and desist order was passed by the erstwhile MRTP Commission on August 31, 2006 whereby AIMTC was directed to restrain from such restrictive practices.

 Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/cci-slaps-rs-14-24-lakh-penalty-on-road-transporters-grouping-115021700733_1.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Michigan House Approves 'Right-to-Work' Bill

Amid raucous protests, the Republican-led Michigan House approved a contentious right-to-work bill on  Dec 11 limiting unions' strength in the state where the (Union for American Auto Workers)  UAW was born. The chamber passed a measure dealing with public-sector workers 58-51 as protesters shouted "shame on you" from the gallery and huge crowds of union backers massed in the state Capitol halls and on the grounds. Backers said a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics said it would drive down wages and benefits. The right-to-work movement has been growing in the country since Wisconsin fought a similar battle with unions over two years ago. Michigan would become the 24th state to enact right-to-work provisions, and passage of the legislation would deal a stunning blow to the power of organized labor in the United States. Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 passed laws severely restricting the power of public s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power to re-assess by AO and disclosure of material facts

In AVTEC Limited v. DCIT, the division of the Delhi High Court held that AO is bound to look at the litigation history of the assessee and cannot expect the assessee to inform him.  In the instant case, the Petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of automobiles, power trains and power shift transmissions along with their components, approached the High Court challenging the re-assessment order passed against them. For the year 2006-07, the Petitioner entered into a Business Transfer Agreement with Hindustan Motors Ltd, as per which, the Petitioner took over the business from HML.  While filing income tax return for the said year, the petitioner claimed the expenses incurred in respect of professional and legal charges for the purpose of taking over of the business from HML as capital expenses and claimed depreciation. Article referred: http://www.taxscan.in/assessing-officer-bound-look-litigation-history-assessee-delhi-hc-read-order/8087/
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more