Google's disputed policies with ADIF's grievances in Google Ads have been dismissed by the Competition Commission of India.
Competition Commission of India Declines to Re-Examine Google's Ad Policies, Broadens Wider Probe
In a recent development, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has decided not to re-examine Google's Ad policies in the online search advertising services market, citing a lack of new evidence. However, the CCI has expanded and consolidated its existing broader investigation into Google's alleged anti-competitive practices in online advertising.
The decision comes after the Alliance of Digital India Foundation (ADIF) filed a complaint alleging that Google was abusing its dominant position through its Ads policies. ADIF argued that these policies were unfair, discriminatory, and not backed by reasonable justifications, thereby violating sections of the Competition Act.
In its order dated August 1, 2025, the CCI pointed out four specific practices that ADIF had highlighted: a ban on third-party technical support ads, restricting 'Call Ads' to mobile devices only, a non-transparent ad ranking system, and permitting competitors to bid on registered trademarks as keywords.
However, the CCI held that the underlying issues in ADIF's complaint were either the same or substantially the same as in earlier rulings, barring fresh inquiry. The Commission relied on past findings in the Matrimony.com and Vishal Gupta cases to support Google's ad policies.
Google has defended its ad policies as pro-user and pro-competition. The tech giant claimed that its policies are designed to ensure consumer safety and promote user choice. Google also asserted that no dominant position could be claimed solely on the basis of Google's general search dominance, as ad placement was determined by multiple auction factors including quality score and bid value.
The CCI acknowledged that Google's conduct requires scrutiny under Section 4 of the Competition Act, which prohibits abuse of dominant position. In response, the Commission directed the Director General to carry out a consolidated investigation covering various layers of Google's online advertising practices and submit a comprehensive report.
Google welcomed the CCI's dismissal of one part of the complaint and expressed confidence that the ongoing investigations will confirm its compliance with competition law. The tech giant also noted that it had introduced restrictions on third-party technical support ads globally in 2018 after repeated consumer harm and scams.
In a related development, the Delhi High Court's decision in DRS Logistics v. Google was noted by the CCI. The court held that consumers searching for trademarks may be directed to competitors or reviewers. However, the keyword bidding policy was found to enhance user choice and cannot be treated as anti-competitive by the CCI.
The role of the competition regulator includes evaluating unfair conditions imposed by dominant players, as per the Delhi High Court's decision. The CCI emphasized that competition law functions in rem, not in personam, and that its earlier findings bind similar claims unless materially new facts emerge. The Commission invoked Section 26(2A) of the Act, introduced via the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2023, to reject ADIF's contention of re-investigating the same issue.
In conclusion, while the CCI has closed the specific complaint concerning Google's Ads policies on online search advertising for lack of new evidence, it has broadened and consolidated a wider probe into Google's overall online advertising and AdTech practices alleged to be abusive of dominance. The ongoing investigation will shed light on whether Google's practices comply with the Competition Act and maintain a fair and competitive market.
In the context of Google's online search advertising services market, the Alliance of Digital India Foundation argued that Google's Ad policies were unfair, discriminatory, and violated sections of the Competition Act due to Google's dominant position.
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) acknowledged Google's practices require scrutiny under Section 4 of the Competition Act and directed a consolidated investigation into Google's online advertising and AdTech practices, focusing on potential abuse of dominance.
