In a communication she to Shri Piyush Goyal, Union Commerce & Industry Minister today, the Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) said that since e commerce is a promising future mode of business in the Country but greatly vitiated by certain malpractices resulting into creation of an uneven level playing field and unfair competition, the Government must take immediate steps to eliminate all such malpractices enable the e c commerce market a even level playing field with fair competition. The CAIT has said that it has already launched a nationwide campaign to digitise 7 crore traders of the Country and will bring them on online business but the intent of control & domination of MNCs & Domestic players must be curbed with strict rules and regulations in e commerce policy. CAIT National President Mr. B.C.Bhartia & Secretary General Mr. Praveen Khandelwal in the communication sent to Shri Goyal suggested that e commerce policy should be make a robust policy so that e commerce market in the Country must not fall prey to the wills and whims of some major e commerce players.
They have urged Shri Goyal to include some mandatory provision in e commerce policy including mandatory registration of e commerce companies whether big or small with DPIIT. Since Hon’ble Prime Minister is much emphasising on adoption of digital payments, the Cash on delivery (COD) system in e commerce should be disposed off and all payments must be in digital payment mode. An “E Commerce Ombudsman” should be constituted to deal with violations of Rules & Regulations. Strict action should be proposed against violations of Rules & Regulations.. Since Data constitute a vital element, sufficient provisions should be incorporated to ensure no misuse of Data. A Joint Committee comprising of senior officials, representatives from trade & e commerce companies should be formed to ensure smooth conduct of business at e commerce through dialogues. They further said that under the present policy of the Government, the online retailers can undertake only B2B model of business in retail and for B2C model, they are under obligation to strictly adhere to marketplace model and therefore must have certain fundamentals invariably in their business model including that the technology provider will provide an e-marketplace platform only.The sellers registered with such e- marketplace shall display their material on e market platform and to close the deal of selling without having any outer interference. The technology provider will get commission or agreed fees per successful transaction.The logistic Companies shall also earn revenue by making door deliveries of the orders.Both technology provider and the sellers are under obligation to comply with relevant Laws, Acts, Rules and Regulations and are not suppose to indulge into any unfair means of business.
Both Mr. Bhartia & Mr. Khandelwal said that instead of playing in a business like manner as obligatory on them as per fundamentals of marketplace model, such online retailers are by-passing all such fundamentals and taking advantage of systematic loopholes, the online portals have indulged into B2C business format which is a clear violation of the policy of the Government. The price fiasco on online retail portals has provoked many questions? If these online retailers are nothing other than a marketplace then how can they offer any “SALE” since they are not the owners of the inventory? The right of inventory lies with the sellers registered with such portals. Have they taken written and express consent of all the sellers registered with them? How the e commerce companies are able to sell same brand and quality of goods much cheaper than brick and mortar shops. In many cases, the selling price of online retailer is much cheaper than wholesale lending price of offline market.In B2B model where is the need of inserting such large scale advertisements by these online retail companies.
Both trade leaders said that the loss accrued to sellers registered on online portals by selling commodities at a much cheaper rate is being subsidized by the marketplace technology owner company, or the Manufacturing Companies owing particular Brands have different price mechanism for online portals under which products are given to them at a much lower price than the offline market, or some entity is funding such losses by remaining behind the curtain for their own various reasons, or it has more influx of products which originate from grey market. It is for either of these reasons, there is difference of prices in offline and online trade. They apprehended that the set of corporate investors who first lobbied for FDI in multi brand retail and having failed to enter into retail trade of India, seems to be the same forces who might be operating in e retail sector behind the curtain.
Mr. Bhartia & Mr. Khandelwal has urged Mr. Goyal that Government must distinguish between technology provider v/s foreign investor. The concept of providing technology is well accepted but the issue of deriving foreign investment in Indian Companies owing the technology platform needs to be looked into so as to block any loophole which may provide an advantageous position to global retailers to control and dominate the retail trade at a later stage through online retail portals who are currently making all efforts to generate more and more visitors on their respective portals. There is a need to check the business modalities of the online retailers in cases where they receive financial funding in their portals from overseas and selling commodities in retail on their own portal in a different business entity.