CCI Finds HP India and Five Resellers Guilty of Bid Rigging, Imposes Penalties

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has held HP India Sales Private Limited and five of its resellers guilty of cartelization in the sale and supply of Personal Systems Products to government buyers through the Government e-Marketplace (GeM) portal. The order, passed under Section 27 of the Competition Act, 2002 in a Suo Motu Case, was issued by a four-member bench comprising Chairperson Ravneet Kaur and Members Anil Agrawal, Sweta Kakkad and Deepak Anurag, dated 13th July 2026. 

Background of the Case

The suo motu case arose from an application filed by HP India under Section 46 of the Competition Act, 2002 read with the Competition Commission of India (Lesser Penalty) Regulations, 2009. Based on this application, the Commission formed a prima facie opinion of contravention of Section 3 of the Act and, on 17th November 2020, directed the Director General (DG) to investigate GeM tenders floated by Delhi-based procurers for Personal System Products valued at ₹1 crore or more. 

During the investigation, a former HP India official separately approached the Commission on 24th August 2021, and Delphi Infosolutions Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2) did so on 19th May 2022, both under Section 46 of the Competition Act, 2002. The DG submitted its investigation report on 26th March 2023. The Commission, in its meeting on 15th November 2023, referred the matter back to the DG for further investigation under Section 26(3A) of the Act. A supplementary consolidated investigation report was submitted on 6 March 2024. 

Findings of the Investigation Report

The DG examined 60 tenders floated on GeM, of which 41 met the criteria set out in the prima facie order. Of these, 30 tenders involved participation by HP India and its resellers or resellers of other Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs). The DG found incriminating emails establishing collusion in seven GeM tenders in contravention of Section 3(3) of the 2002 Act. In these seven tenders, HP India emerged as the lowest bidder (L-1) in three, its reseller M Integraph System Pvt. Ltd. in one, while resellers of Acer and Dell won two and one tender respectively. 

The DG found HP India and ten of its resellers, including Delphi Infosolutions, Comnet Vision (I) Pvt. Ltd., Digitech Computers, Softlabs Solution, Orbit Techsol India Pvt. Ltd., Thoughtsol Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Hind Technocare, Intensity Global Technologies Pvt. Ltd., M Integraph System Pvt. Ltd. and Krishna Computer, to have acted in contravention of Section 3(3)(d) read with Section 3(1) of the Competition Act, 2002. Twenty individuals across these entities were also identified under Section 48 of the Act. The DG additionally examined 28 other resellers but found no evidence implicating them. 

Key Findings on Merits

The Competition Commission of India rejected arguments that the OEM-reseller relationship was purely vertical and outside the scope of Section 3(3), holding that HP India and its resellers had stepped into competing, horizontal positions while bidding in the same tenders. It also rejected the contention that collusion in tenders below ₹1 crore fell outside its jurisdiction, holding that such conduct came within Section 3(3)(d) of the Act. 

On individual entities, the Commission held as follows: 

• HP India (OP-1): Found to have dictated bid prices to resellers and manipulated their participation by withholding Manufacturer's Authorisation Forms (MAFs).
• Delphi Infosolutions (OP-2): Found in contravention based on admissions of its officials regarding support/cover bidding.
• Digitech Computers (OP-4): Found in contravention based on admission of bidding as per HP India's directions.
• Orbit Techsol (OP-6): Found in contravention based on email evidence of HP India directing bid prices.
• Hind Technocare (OP-8): Found in contravention for participating in a tender per prices dictated by HP India.
• Krishna Computer (OP-11): Found to have acted on HP India's directions in two tenders.

The Commission found no evidence of contravention against Comnet Vision, Softlabs Solution, Thoughtsol Infotech, Intensity Global Technologies and M Integraph System, and cleared them of the charges. 

Among individuals, liability under Section 48(1) and 48(3) was fixed on named officials of HP India, Delphi and Orbit Techsol. No individual liability was imposed in respect of Digitech, Hind Technocare and Krishna Computer, as these are proprietorship firms. 

Penalties Imposed by CCI

The Commission calculated penalties based on average relevant turnover from Personal System Products for FYs 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20, applying reductions for mitigating factors such as disclosure, cooperation and first-time contravention. HP India was penalised after a reduction to ₹126.87 crore. Delphi Infosolutions was penalised ₹9,52,117, with its individual officials penalised ₹41,552 and ₹62,666. Digitech Computers was penalised ₹17,96,599. Orbit Techsol was penalised ₹86,31,739, with its CEO penalised ₹1,52,770. Hind Technocare was penalised ₹6,72,428, and Krishna Computer ₹1,91,192. Individual officials of HP India were penalised amounts ranging from ₹12,403 to ₹67,726. 

CCI Directions for HP India and Resellers

Under Section 27(a) of the Competition Act, 2002, the Commission directed the contravening parties and liable individuals to cease and desist from the anti-competitive practices identified. Under Section 27(g), it directed the contravening OPs to conduct competition compliance training programmes and submit compliance reports within 60 days. All penalty amounts are to be deposited within 60 days of receipt of the order. The Commission also granted confidentiality over certain documents for three years under Regulation 36 of the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations, 2024, and directed that both public and confidential versions of the order be issued to the concerned parties.