- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
CCPA slaps Flipkart with fine of ₹1 lakh for violating required standards
CCPA slaps Flipkart with fine of ₹1 lakh for violating required standards
CCPA directs Flipkart to notify consumers of all 598 pressure cookers sold on its platform and recall the products
Flipkart has been fined with ₹1 lakh by the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) for allowing the sale of pressure cookers in violation of the required standards and is thereby directed to recall the pressure cookers and reimburse their prices to consumers. Flipkart is also directed to submit a compliance report within 45 days.
The Ministry of Consumer Affairs (Ministry) said that all pressure cookers are required to be in accordance with IS 2347:2017 as per the Domestic Pressure Cooker (Quality Control) Order, which came into force on 1 February, 2021.
"The company has also been directed to pay a penalty of ₹1 lakh for allowing the sale of such pressure cookers on its e-commerce platform and violating the rights of consumers," the Ministry said in a statement.
The Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) has conducted a search and seizure of a number of non-standard helmets and pressure cookers.
"1,435 pressure cookers and 1,088 helmets which did not conform to mandatory standards have been seized by BIS. CCPA has also written to Chief Secretaries of all states and U.Ts. to direct requisite action under law and ensure compliance with standards directed for compulsory use by the Central Government to protect the interest of consumers," the Ministry added.
Further, CCPA has written to Director General, Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) to duly notify all regional branches of BIS to take immediate cognizance of offences of a violation of mandatory standards under the provisions of the BIS Act, 2016.
Flipkart earned a total fee of ₹1,84,263 through the sale of such pressure cookers on its e-commerce platform.