India's competition authority has entered a more aggressive enforcement phase. International businesses operating in the country now face heightened scrutiny across merger notifications, cartel investigations, and market dominance reviews. Penalties have grown substantially, and procedural timelines are tighter than many foreign companies expect.
India's Competition Commission of India (the competition authority) has sharpened its enforcement tools through amendments to competition legislation that took effect in 2024. The revised rules introduce deal-value thresholds for merger notification, strengthen the leniency programme, and raise maximum penalties for anti-competitive conduct. International companies with Indian revenues, assets, or supply-chain relationships are directly affected and must review their compliance position now.
This alert explains which business categories face the greatest exposure, what the key thresholds are, and what immediate steps to take.
What changed – and when it took effect
India's competition legislation was substantially amended through changes that came into force in 2024. The reforms represent the most significant overhaul of the competition regulatory regime in over a decade.
Deal-value merger notification threshold. For the first time, a deal-value trigger applies alongside the traditional asset and turnover thresholds. Transactions where the consideration exceeds a prescribed value must now be notified to the competition authority – even if the target has limited Indian assets or revenues. This change directly affects technology, digital platform, and start-up acquisitions that previously fell below the radar.
Expanded cartel enforcement powers. The competition authority now holds broader powers to investigate hub-and-spoke cartel arrangements – where a central platform or intermediary coordinates pricing or market allocation among competing suppliers. Digital markets are a primary enforcement target. Penalties for cartel conduct can reach a significant share of the average annual global turnover of the infringing entity, not merely Indian turnover.
Market dominance and abuse. The definition of market dominance has been clarified to address multi-sided platforms and digital ecosystems. A company holding a strong position in one market may now face scrutiny for leveraging that position into adjacent markets. This matters particularly for international technology companies, financial service providers, and e-commerce operators.
Leniency programme enhancements. The revised leniency programme offers stronger protections for the first applicant to disclose a cartel. Subsequent applicants receive progressively reduced but still meaningful penalty reductions. The competition authority has signalled that it will prioritise leniency-driven investigations in sectors such as pharmaceuticals, logistics, and construction materials.
Settlement and commitment mechanisms. A formal settlement procedure now allows parties under investigation to resolve matters before a final order. Commitments can be offered to address competition concerns without an admission of liability. These tools reduce litigation risk but require careful calibration – an ill-timed or inadequate offer may prejudice a party's position before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), the primary appellate body for competition decisions.
For companies whose corporate structure or financing arrangements also involve the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). which handles insolvency, mergers. Additionally. Certain corporate disputes under Indian corporate legislation. the interaction between competition clearance and NCLT approval timelines creates a practical sequencing challenge. Similarly, businesses regulated by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) or the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) must coordinate competition filings with sectoral regulatory approvals.
For a detailed review of your competition law exposure in India, contact us at ferrazwhitmore.com/services/competition-law/india/ or email info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Who is affected – threshold criteria and compliance deadlines
The following categories of international business face direct and immediate compliance obligations.
Companies making acquisitions in India. Any transaction that meets the deal-value threshold – or the existing asset and turnover thresholds – requires pre-merger notification. Closing a notifiable transaction without approval attracts significant penalties. The standstill obligation applies from the date of execution of the binding agreement. The competition authority must be notified within 30 calendar days of that date.
Technology and digital platform operators. Platforms with market dominance in India – whether in search, e-commerce, payments, or ride-hailing – are under active surveillance. Investigations can be initiated on the competition authority's own motion, without a complaint. Foreign-headquartered platforms with Indian user bases must assess whether their pricing, ranking, or self-preferencing practices could constitute abuse of a dominant position.
Companies in cartel-risk sectors. Sectors with historically coordinated conduct – pharmaceuticals, cement, steel, logistics, insurance, and financial services – face heightened scrutiny. Companies that participate in trade associations, industry pricing discussions, or information-exchange arrangements must review those practices against the revised cartel provisions.
Businesses with existing investigations or inquiries. If the competition authority has already issued a notice or opened a preliminary inquiry, the revised enforcement regime applies to pending matters. Companies in this position should reassess whether a leniency application or a settlement offer is now more advantageous than contesting the matter to a final order.
Compliance deadline. The merger notification changes applied from the effective date of the 2024 amendments. There is no transitional period for deal-value notifications – the obligation attaches to agreements signed on or after the effective date. Companies with transactions in pipeline must treat this as an immediate compliance item. Ongoing conduct reviews – for dominance or cartel issues – should be completed within 60 to 90 days to allow time for remediation before any enforcement action crystallises.
Companies facing related corporate disputes in India involving NCLT proceedings or shareholder enforcement matters should note that competition findings can affect those parallel proceedings.
To receive an expert assessment of your competition compliance position in India, email us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Immediate action items for international companies
The following steps are recommended for any international business with Indian operations, investments, or supply-chain relationships.
- Audit pending and pipeline transactions against both the traditional thresholds and the new deal-value threshold. Do not assume that a transaction is below the filing threshold without a formal assessment under the revised rules.
- Review digital and platform conduct for self-preferencing, exclusive dealing, tying, and pricing practices that could constitute abuse of market dominance. Document the commercial rationale for any conduct that might attract scrutiny.
- Assess trade association and information-exchange participation for cartel exposure. Any arrangement that involves discussion of prices, market shares, customers, or territories with competitors carries risk under Indian competition legislation.
- Evaluate leniency eligibility if the company has knowledge of a cartel that has not yet been disclosed. First-mover advantage under the leniency programme is significant. Delay reduces the benefit available and increases the risk that a competitor files first.
- Coordinate with SEBI, RBI, and NCLT timelines where a transaction or restructuring requires approvals from multiple regulators. Competition clearance often sits on the critical path. Sequencing errors cause material delays and can trigger standstill penalty exposure.
For context on how India's enforcement trajectory compares to other high-growth markets, see our alert on competition enforcement in the UAE.
About Ferraz & Whitmore
Ferraz & Whitmore is an international law firm based in Lisbon, advising business clients across 46 jurisdictions. Our competition law practice supports international companies facing merger notification obligations, cartel investigations, and market dominance inquiries in India and across Asia-Pacific markets. We work with multinationals, private equity investors, and in-house legal teams who need clear, actionable guidance across complex regulatory systems. Engaging a lawyer in India with cross-border experience is essential when enforcement timelines are tight and penalties are material. As an international law firm with experience before competition authorities in high-growth markets, Ferraz & Whitmore helps clients build effective compliance strategies and manage enforcement risk. To discuss your situation in India, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. Ferraz & Whitmore assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@ferrazwhitmore.com.