The order, reviewed by Mintstated the nationwide shopper rights watchdog discovered non-compliant toys continued to be listed, hosted, and offered on the platform even after the Toys (High quality Management) Order, 2020, got here into pressure on 1 January 2021. The QCO, notified below the BIS Act, makes BIS certification obligatory for toys meant for youngsters below 14 years of age.
The proceedings started after the authority took suo motu cognisance of listings of toys that allegedly lacked obligatory BIS certification. Throughout the inquiry, it emerged that two sellers—Stallion Buying and selling Firm and Thriftkart—had offered 305 models of the impugned merchandise in 2022 and 2023, producing income of ₹1.46 lakh, whereas the platform earned ₹41,032 in charges from these gross sales.
An government of a number one toy manufacturing firm stated stricter enforcement of BIS requirements will assist guarantee a stage enjoying discipline for compliant producers and defend shoppers from substandard merchandise.
“On-line marketplaces can’t escape duty by calling themselves intermediaries. When regulated merchandise corresponding to toys are offered with out obligatory BIS compliance, it immediately compromises little one security,” stated Ashim Sanyal, chief government of the Shopper VOICE.
“Platforms should put in place stronger verification techniques to make sure that solely licensed merchandise are listed. Enforcement must be constant to guard shoppers and guarantee truthful competitors for compliant producers,” Sanyal added.
Shopper security first
The CCPA, in its order, noticed that, regardless of the platform’s declare to be merely an middleman below the Info Expertise Act, it had hosted sellers with unverifiable addresses and allowed listings with out correct BIS particulars. The investigation report, submitted by the director normal (investigation) in December 2025, famous that toys missing obligatory certification have been nonetheless out there on the platform as lately as that month.
In accordance with the order, Snapdeal’s case was defended by the authorized workforce of Ace Vector Ltd, which argued that the corporate operates as a market entity and neither owns stock nor bodily inspects the products offered on its platform.
The corporate’s workforce additional stated sellers are required to declare BIS applicability and supply registration numbers throughout itemizing, and that it has built-in its system with the BIS database via an API (software programming interface) for real-time verification. The corporate additionally contended that it promptly deactivated the particular listings as soon as notified and denied any proof of shopper hurt.
Nevertheless, the authority rejected the “on-line mall” analogy. It famous that not like bodily buying malls, e-commerce platforms actively handle reductions, promotional campaigns corresponding to “Deal of the Day” and “Toofan Sale”, logistics and refund processes, thereby exercising substantial management over transactions. This, the order stated, locations a corresponding obligation of due diligence on the platform.
The CCPA held that the sale of non-compliant toys quantities to an unfair commerce apply below Part 2(47) of the Shopper Safety Act, 2019, and that concealing or failing to prominently disclose BIS certification quantities to deceptive illustration.
The CCPA underlined that the regulation has shifted from caveat emptor (purchaser beware) to caveat venditor (let the vendor beware), inserting the burden of security and compliance on sellers and facilitating platforms.
The authority additional famous that when requested whether or not it might assure that solely BIS-compliant toys could be offered sooner or later, the corporate failed to offer a categorical endeavor. It concluded that the continued itemizing of non-compliant toys, coupled with business profit derived from such gross sales, warranted regulatory motion.
Aside from the financial penalty of ₹5 lakh, the CCPA directed Snapdeal to make sure that no non-compliant toy is listed or marketed on its platform going ahead and to prominently show its contact particulars and grievance officer data to facilitate shopper redressal.
A Mint question despatched to Snapdeal on this regard remained unanswered.
The case file
The BIS on 19 March 2025 performed raids on the warehouses of main e-commerce distributors, together with Amazon and Flipkart, and seized hundreds of substandard merchandise, Mint reported on 27 March.
Throughout the raids, over 3,500 merchandise, together with water geysers, meals mixers, and different electrical home equipment, have been confiscated for both missing the obligatory ISI mark or carrying faux labels.
This marked the second such enforcement motion by BIS towards Amazon and Flipkart in March, following an earlier raid on 7 March. The estimated worth of products seized in the course of the 19 March operation was round ₹70 lakh.