Anti-competitive agreements under Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002 are arrangements that harm or are likely to harm fair competition in Indian markets. Such agreements can restrict consumer choice, increase prices, limit production and prevent businesses from competing fairly. They may involve competing businesses coordinating prices or suppliers imposing restrictive conditions on distributors.
Indian competition law aims to protect consumers and ensure a fair marketplace. Section 3 prohibits agreements that cause or are likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition (AAEC) in India. An AAEC means a significant negative impact on competition in a market. The Competition Commission of India (CCI) is the statutory authority responsible for enforcing these provisions.
What Is Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002?
The Competition Act, 2002 regulates anti-competitive practices, abuse of dominant position and certain mergers and acquisitions. Section 3 specifically deals with agreements that adversely affect competition.
Under Section 3(1), enterprises, associations of enterprises, persons and associations of persons must not enter into agreements concerning the production, supply, distribution, storage, acquisition or control of goods, or the provision of services, that cause or are likely to cause an AAEC in India.
Section 3(2) provides that an agreement contravening Section 3 is void. This means the agreement cannot be legally enforced.
Importantly, an agreement need not always be a formally signed contract. Section 2(b) of the Act defines an agreement broadly to include arrangements, understandings and concerted actions, whether or not they are formal or intended to be legally enforceable.
Types of Anti-Competitive Agreements Under Section 3
The Act broadly distinguishes between horizontal agreements and vertical agreements.
1. Horizontal Agreements Under Section 3(3)
Horizontal agreements are arrangements between businesses or persons operating in the same or similar line of trade. These provisions address coordination between competitors.
Four major categories are covered:
- Price fixing: Competitors agree to charge similar prices or manipulate purchase or sale prices.
- Limiting production or supply: Businesses coordinate to restrict output or the availability of goods and services.
- Market allocation: Competitors divide customers, geographical areas or product categories among themselves.
- Bid rigging: Participants coordinate bids in a tender to reduce genuine competition.
For example, if several suppliers agree to submit artificially high bids for a government contract, the arrangement may constitute bid rigging.
Section 3(3) presumes that these specified agreements have an AAEC. This is a rebuttable presumption, meaning it can be challenged with appropriate evidence. The provision also covers qualifying hub-and-spoke arrangements involving parties that facilitate coordination among competitors.
2. Vertical Agreements Under Section 3(4)
Vertical agreements involve businesses operating at different stages of a production or distribution chain, such as manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers.
The Act identifies the following arrangements:
- Tie-in arrangements: A buyer must purchase one product to obtain another.
- Exclusive dealing: A buyer or seller is restricted from dealing in competing goods or services.
- Exclusive distribution: Supply or distribution is restricted or allocated to particular territories or markets.
- Refusal to deal: An arrangement restricts the persons or classes of persons with whom a business may trade.
- Resale price maintenance: A supplier restricts the resale price charged by a downstream seller.
Unlike the specified horizontal agreements under Section 3(3), these arrangements are assessed on whether they cause or are likely to cause an AAEC. Their existence alone does not automatically establish a violation.
Horizontal vs Vertical Agreements: Key Differences
| Basis | Horizontal agreements | Vertical agreements |
|---|---|---|
| Parties | Competitors at the same market level | Businesses at different supply-chain levels |
| Provision | Section 3(3) | Section 3(4) |
| Examples | Price fixing, market allocation, bid rigging | Exclusive dealing, tie-in arrangements |
| Legal test | Rebuttable presumption of AAEC for specified agreements | AAEC must be established |
| Main concern | Coordination between competitors | Restrictions affecting competition within a supply chain |
Exceptions Under Section 3(5)
Section 3(5) provides limited exceptions to the prohibition. It protects the reasonable exercise of certain intellectual property rights, including rights under the Copyright Act, 1957, the Patents Act, 1970, the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, the Designs Act, 2000 and the Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Layout-Design Act, 2000.
The exception applies only to reasonable conditions necessary to protect the relevant intellectual property rights. It is not a blanket exemption for every restrictive licensing arrangement.
Section 3(5) also addresses agreements relating exclusively to the export of goods from India. These statutory protections should be interpreted within their specified limits.
Role of the Competition Commission of India
Under Sections 19 and 26 of the Competition Act, the CCI can examine alleged anti-competitive agreements. Information may be submitted by a person, consumer or association, and the Commission may also act on a government or statutory authority reference or take up a matter on its own motion.
The general process is:
Information or reference → Preliminary assessment → Investigation, where directed → Findings and hearing → Final order
Under Section 26, the CCI may direct the Director General to investigate when it forms a prima facie opinion that an inquiry is warranted. The parties concerned are given the opportunity to respond in accordance with the Act and applicable regulations.
Penalties and Remedies
Section 27 empowers the CCI to issue orders against enterprises or persons involved in anti-competitive agreements. Depending on the circumstances, it may direct parties to discontinue the agreement, refrain from repeating the conduct, modify the agreement or pay a penalty.
For enterprises or persons party to a contravening agreement, the statutory penalty may extend to 10% of the average turnover or income for the preceding three financial years, subject to the applicable legal framework. For cartel participants, the Act provides for a penalty of up to three times the profit for each year of continuation of the agreement or 10% of turnover or income for each year, whichever is higher.
The 2023 amendment introduced global turnover derived from all products and services into the statutory definition of turnover for these penalty provisions. The applicable calculation must be determined in accordance with the Act and relevant regulations.
Recent Changes in Competition Law
The Competition (Amendment) Act, 2023 broadened Section 3 to address additional forms of anti-competitive coordination, including qualifying hub-and-spoke arrangements. It also expanded the wording of Section 3(4) beyond an exhaustive list of traditional vertical restraints.
The CCI’s enforcement framework also includes the Competition Commission of India (Lesser Penalty) Regulations, 2024, which provide a lesser-penalty-plus mechanism for qualifying disclosures about another cartel. Businesses should consult the latest statutory text and regulations before assessing compliance obligations.
Frequently Asked Questions
It is an arrangement prohibited by Section 3 because it causes or is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India.
No. Section 3(3) applies to specified categories of horizontal agreements that attract a rebuttable presumption of AAEC. Other arrangements require assessment under the applicable legal test.
Price fixing generally involves coordination of prices among competitors. Resale price maintenance concerns restrictions imposed on the resale prices charged by downstream sellers.
The CCI investigates and adjudicates alleged contraventions of competition law and may issue directions and penalties under the Act.
Yes. The statutory definition of an agreement includes informal arrangements and understandings, whether or not they are written.
Want the deeper dive? Grab the reference book.
