Jindal Stainless Gets Clean Chit From CCI In Nickel Sourcing Case

The Competition Commission of India has cleared Jindal Stainless Limited of allegations that it struck anti-competitive exclusive supply deals with Indonesian nickel producers, according to an order passed on Tuesday.

An unnamed Indian stainless-steel manufacturer, whose identity the Commission has kept confidential, had approached CCI with the complaint. The manufacturer, which is involved in downstream production and trade of stainless-steel products, alleged that Jindal Stainless had locked in exclusive arrangements with Indonesian suppliers for nickel-rich stainless-steel slabs and hot-rolled coil, cutting off rival Indian companies from this key input, as per media reports.

The complainant pointed out that India has no domestic nickel reserves, making its stainless-steel industry heavily dependent on imports, a dependency that deepened after Indonesia banned exports of unprocessed nickel ore in 2020.

The complaint further claimed that Jindal Stainless's dealership scheme, called "Jindal Saathi," tied distributors into buying mainly from the company through memoranda of understanding.

What The CCI Found

In its order, the Commission said the complainant failed to show any proof that rival manufacturers faced production cuts, falling output, market exit, or any other competitive harm because of restricted access to these inputs.

Looking at the upstream market, the Commission concluded that Jindal Stainless does not hold a dominant position, pointing to the presence of several domestic and international suppliers, including multiple overseas manufacturers certified by the Bureau of Indian Standards.

On the downstream side, for cold-rolled stainless steel, the Commission acknowledged that Jindal Stainless does appear to hold a dominant position, given its scale, financial strength and vertical integration. However, it found no evidence that the company had abused this position.

"The Commission is of the prima facie view that the allegation that the impugned arrangements resulted in denial of market access to competing manufacturers in the downstream market for CRSS in India is not substantiated and, prima facie, there appears to be no violation of Section 4(2)(c) of the Act," the CCI said in its order, as quoted by reports.

The Commission also examined the "Jindal Saathi" dealership programme and found that joining it, along with signing the related MoUs, is entirely voluntary and not a requirement for buying material from the company.

CCI added that the programme's inspection, traceability and record-keeping requirements appear aimed at preventing counterfeit products and ensuring traceability, rather than limiting the commercial freedom of participants.