TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 731
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (M-9810806250) Mr. Rohan Arora, Adv. for R-5 Ms. Rukhmini Bobde, Ms. Sonal Gupta, Mr. Ishan Nagar, Mr. Abhishek Thakral & Mr. Amlaan Kumar, Advs. for R-(FHRAI) (M- 8077855788) Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners impugning the order dated 6th December, 2022 passed by the NCLAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi in the Competition Appeal (AT) No.57/2022 titled "Make My Trip (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Competition Commission of India". The said appeal arises out of the order dated 19th October, 2022 passed by the Competition Commission of India (hereinafter, "CCI") in Case No.14 of 2019 titled "Federation of Hotel & Restaurant Associations of India (FHRAI) and Anr. v. MakeMyTrip India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.", to the following effect. "311. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commission finds the conduct of MMT-Go in violation of the provisions of Section 4(2)(a)(i) as well as Section 4(2)(c) read with Section 4(1) of the Act as adumbrated in this order. Further, for the reasons recorded in this order, the arrangement between MMT-Go and OYO has also been found to be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase of digital market platforms, restricting revenue to just one segment would not appropriately capture the interdependent and integrated nature of the ecosystem wherein one product/ service reinforces multiple other products/ services. This approach might be appropriate in traditional markets, but not so much so in case of two-sided or multi-sided platforms. In such platforms, not only two user sides are interacting and thus, intricately intertwined with each other, but the products/ services offered by the platform operator through other verticals also derive strength from each other due to economies of scope and scale. Accordingly, in such markets, for the purposes of revenue determination, the entire platform has to be taken as one unit. Any other interpretation or approach would render the deterrence exerted by the Statute as redundant and nugatory. Keeping in view the nature of the services offered by MMT-Go, the Commission considers it appropriate to consider its entire turnover as shown in its financial statements submitted by it as the relevant turnover. Based on the foregoing, the Commission deems it fit to impose on MMT-Go a monetary penalty @5% of its relevant turnover....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l 3,897.33 6,235.78 10,133.11 Average 1,299.11 2,078.59 3,377.70 5% of Average Relevant Turnover 168.88 Rupees One Hundred Sixty-Eight Crores and Eighty-Eight Lakhs only 321. The Commission directs MMT-Go and OYO to deposit the respective penalty amounts as calculated above within a period of 60 days of receipt of the present order, in accordance with the provisions of the Act." 3. Aggrieved by the above order dated 19th October, 2022, the Petitioner No.1 - Make My Trip (India) Pvt. Ltd. challenged the same before the NCLAT, Principal Bench, Delhi. Vide the impugned order dated 6th December, 2022, the NCLAT has admitted the said appeal, however, directed a deposit of 10% of the penalty amount, which was imposed by the CCI as a condition for admission of the appeal. The impugned order dated 6th December, 2022 passed by the NCLAT, reads as under: "06.12.2022. Heard Mr. Mukul Rohatagi, Ld. Sr. Counsel with Mr. Ranjit Srinivasan, Ld. Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. Shashank Gautam, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant, Mr. Samar Bansal Ld. Counsel for the CCI/R-1 as well as Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar, Ld. Counsel for the Res....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Oravel Stays Limited v. CCI & Ors. Be that as it may, it is submitted that the clear understanding of the parties present, while the impugned order dated 6th December, 2022 was passed, was that, subject to deposit of 10% of the penalty amount imposed by the CCI, the recovery of the remaining 90% of the penalty amount would remain stayed. He further submits that, insofar as the remaining directions issued by the CCI vide impugned order dated 19th October, 2022 are concerned, the NCLAT has made it clear that it has not dealt with any other part of the order passed by the CCI. In addition, it is contended that the appeal against the order passed by the NCLAT would lie to the Supreme Court under Section 53T of The Competition Act, 2002. 6. Heard ld. Counsel for the parties. This Court has also perused the order dated 6th December, 2022 passed by the NCLAT, as also, the order dated 19th October, 2022 passed by the CCI. Various directions have been issued by the CCI vide order dated 19th October, 2022, which were challenged before the NCLAT. One of the components of the said order dated 19th October, 2022 is the aspect relating to penalty. The total amount, which has been fixed as pen....