CCI Clears IREL Of Abuse Of Dominance Allegations

CCI Clears IREL of Abuse of Dominance Allegations

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has dismissed allegations of abuse of dominance against IREL (India) Ltd. in the market for Beach Sand Ilmenite, ruling that no contravention of competition law was established.

The complaint, filed by the Beach Mineral Producers Association, accused IREL of violating Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002, by imposing unfair conditions, engaging in discriminatory pricing, and denying market access to domestic consumers.

After a detailed examination, the CCI concluded: "Holistically considering the facts and circumstances of the matter, the material available on record, and based on the foregoing analysis, the Commission is of the view that though the OP (IREL)...is found to be in a dominant position in the relevant market of ‘mining and sale of Beach Sand Ilmenite in India,’ no case of contravention of provisions of Section 4(2)(a)(i), 4(2)(a)(ii), or 4(2)(c) of the Act is made out against the OP in the present matter."

The Commission defined the relevant market as the "mining and supply of Beach Sand Ilmenite in India," specifically excluding substitutes such as Synthetic Rutile, Rutile, Titanium Slag, and imports. With IREL holding over 90% market share in 2021-22, coupled with regulatory barriers limiting private entry and low buyer bargaining power, the CCI acknowledged IREL’s dominance in the sector.

The matter was referred to the Director General (DG) for investigation, but the probe found no evidence of price discrimination between domestic and international buyers. IREL had also argued that it was not an "enterprise" under Section 2(h) of the Competition

Act, 2002, due to its affiliation with the Department of Atomic Energy. However, the CCI rejected this claim, noting that IREL is a Public Sector Undertaking designated as a Miniratna Category-I company.

Addressing the allegations of excessive pricing, the CCI stated: "After considering the arguments put forth by the parties, the Commission is of the considered view that pricing decisions take into account market dynamics, demand-supply equilibrium, other avenues of procurement, and the bargaining power between buyer and seller. In the present matter, based on the price comparison of IREL’s domestic market price vis-à-vis its export price and the import price of Ilmenite, the price of the OP does not appear to be excessive. Sufficient evidence has not been brought on record to establish a case of excessive pricing in this matter."

With this ruling, the CCI closed the case, concluding that while IREL holds a dominant position in the market, there was no substantiated evidence of abuse under the Competition Act.