The case concerns an appeal against the ICC order that had suspended the previous approval given for the Amazon-Future Group agreement.
“The CAIT believes that in view of the fraud played by Amazon, the CCI should have revoked the order and not kept it pending,” the confederation said.
“CAIT’s appeal was listed along with the two appeals filed by Amazon and the All India Consumer Products Distributors Federation,” he added.
The CAIT appeal, which was heard on Friday, pointed out that “Amazon’s entire transaction with the Future Group companies is based on the intention to illegally enter the physical retail market, to take control of retail stores owned by Future Retail and to remove micro, small and medium enterprises and retail traders, the majority of which are represented by CAIT”.
Additionally, CAIT’s attorney stated that “this (transaction) would be a direct threat to the many retail merchants who would not be able to compete with a large-scale e-commerce business model like Amazon’s.” .
CAIT said FDI laws prohibit retail trade in any form by e-commerce entities like Amazon investing in multi-brand retail.
“Amazon did not obtain any government approvals as required by FDI laws for its foreign direct investment in the multi-brand retail market. , Amazon said that since it was investing in FCPL and not FRL, no government approval was required and FDI laws were not sought.
“It is now clear that Amazon sought to acquire strategic rights in FRL through the backdoor, misrepresenting the facts at the ICC and concealing the true nature of the transaction. Therefore, the approval obtained by Amazon before the CCI did not disclose this FDI violation and is tainted with fraud and misrepresentation.”
