PunchTigers, Maliya Boys share points in stalemateCNN TürkMossad'dan CIA'ye kritik İran istihbaratı! Trump'a İHA saldırısı iddiasıInquirerUpgraded Tacloban airport eyes soft opening by March next yearThe Jerusalem PostUS Democrat who defeated embattled Republican Max Miller faces harassment probe - report한겨레스페이스엑스, 스타십 상단부 사상 첫 ‘젓가락 회수’ 성공ZDF heuteAktuelle Pressemitteilungen des ZDFThe Hollywood ReporterRichard Sterban, Oak Ridge Boys’ Bass Singer, Dies at 83الشرقبيانات: أقراص ويجوفي تساعد على فقدان 6% من الوزن خلال 3 أشهرInfobaePapa León XIV en Perú: homilía completa durante la coronación de la Virgen Inmaculada en ChiclayoOnetDwa tankowce wpadły na miny w cieśninie OrmuzDaily MailNow that George is settled at Eton, Kate is joining William in India on first foreign tour for four years조선일보李, 檢 비판한 친명 의원 격려하며 “사법살인·정치탄압 건너는 동안 제 곁에서 고생”
The Daily Newsstand · Free, Always
Sunday, November 15, 2026

Online platforms liable for banned listings: Panel

Translate

Online platforms liable for banned listings: Panel

AI-generated image

NEW DELHI: An online platform cannot hide behind its intermediary status to evade responsibility under consumer protection law and must exercise due diligence before allowing listings of prohibited, hazardous and regulated products, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has ruled.The order will have wider implications and act as a deterrent to the sale of hazardous items such as explosives, acids and jammers that pose a danger, as well as other regulated products. Online platforms and e-commerce companies often cite their intermediary status to escape responsibility and action in such cases.

The NCDRC passed the order while hearing appeals filed by Weblink.in against two orders of the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) concerning the online listing of ammonium nitrate, picric acid and pentaerythritol tetranitrate.

The authority had imposed a penalty of Rs 20 lakh on the platform in the two cases.The commission upheld the penalty imposed by the authority. In its order passed earlier this week, the commission said the platform could not claim immunity under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act on the ground that it had no “actual knowledge” of the listings. It also said the company could not plead “selective diligence”.In one of the orders, the commission said, “The platform has its own list of do’s and don’ts, and it is evident they are not unaware of the precautions while facilitating transactions through their platforms in respect of hazardous substances or such prohibited items detrimental to the life of consumers. The argument that they are not obliged to verify licences as there is no such statutory obligation deserves rejection as the platform has the obligation to take reasonable care and exercise due diligence while allowing its platform to be utilised for such advertisement.

View the original on Times of India →

KioskNews shows a cleaned-up reading view extracted from the publisher’s page — the original always lives on their site, not ours.