ED serving notice to Flipkart and not Amazon ‘raises suspicion’: CAIT


An influential trade association has told the government the Enforcement Directorate (ED) “served notice only to and not to Amazon” when the Karnataka High Court had prime facie found both e-commerce firms guilty of indulging in anti-competitive prices.

ED’s action “raises suspicion”, said Praveen Khandelwal, national secretary general of the Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT), in a letter to the investigating agency’s director after it sent a Rs 10,600-crore recovery notice against for allegedly violating foreign exchange rules.

said it has also made a representation on Saturday to Piyush Goyal, minister for commerce and industry, and Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and urged them to take action.

ALSO READ: In compliance with Indian laws, will cooperate with ED on notice: Flipkart

A spokesperson of did not respond to queries on the issue.

has been in the forefront of a campaign against global e commerce companies, saying they should be banned and penalised for allegedly violating foreign investment policies. However, the global e commerce players have stood firm that there have not been any violations at all. has urged that their anti-competitive policies have destroyed the livelihood of small traders.

In its response to the draft amendment to the government’s Consumer Protection ( e-commerce) Rules 2020, CAIT has suggested some sweeping changes, It wants a a clear transparent definition of different e commerce entities. According to CAIT, an inventory e-commerce entity would mean an entity which runs a retail store on its own e commerce platform, owns the inventory of goods and services and sells such goods and services directly to the consumer on a principal to principal basis.

It has also suggested that no e-commerce entity shall make any segmented offers to particular consumers on an arbitrary basis. The classification of consumers shall be on a transparent and objective basis and offerings shall be uniform across consumers. Secondly, an e-commerce firm will also not use the information collected for sale of goods directly or indirectly by any seller related or not. Thirdly, an e commerce marketplace entity cannot directly or indirectly license its brand or private label products to third parties to be sold on the platform.

Dear Reader,

Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.

We, however, have a request.

As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.

Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.

Digital Editor



Read More:ED serving notice to Flipkart and not Amazon ‘raises suspicion’: CAIT