Current Affairs MCQs for UPSC Prelims — August 2026
Q1. The requirement that the Competition Commission of India issue a show-cause notice before passing a final order in which it differs from the Director General's conclusions — the very lapse that cost it the Grasim penalty — now rests expressly on which one of the following?
- A. The proviso to Section 26(9), which mandates a show-cause notice before the Commission passes its final order
- B. Section 27, which obliges the Commission to accept the Director General's report in all abuse of dominance proceedings
- C. Section 53T, which bars the Commission from ever appealing an order of the Appellate Tribunal to the Supreme Court
- D. Section 19(4), which makes market share the sole and conclusive test of dominance in the relevant market
Q2. Consider the following statements regarding the Supreme Court's 2026 ruling in the Competition Commission of India's appeal concerning Grasim Industries:
1. The Supreme Court itself exonerated Grasim of abuse of dominance in the viscose staple fibre market and closed the proceedings.
2. The Court dismissed the Commission's appeal and upheld the appellate tribunal's order dated 5 May 2026.
3. The penalty set aside was ₹301.6 crore, originally imposed by the Commission in March 2020.
4. The Commission was directed to hear the company afresh on the points where it proposed to differ from the Director General's report.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- The Supreme Court itself exonerated Grasim of abuse of dominance in the viscose staple fibre market and closed the proceedings.
- The Court dismissed the Commission's appeal and upheld the appellate tribunal's order dated 5 May 2026.
- The penalty set aside was ₹301.6 crore, originally imposed by the Commission in March 2020.
- The Commission was directed to hear the company afresh on the points where it proposed to differ from the Director General's report.
- A. 1, 2 and 3
- B. 1 and 4 only
- C. 1, 3 and 4
- D. 2, 3 and 4