Meta Platforms Inc has approached the Delhi High Court challenging a ₹10 lakh penalty imposed by the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) over alleged unauthorised listings of walkie-talkies on Facebook Marketplace, arguing that the platform is not an e-commerce marketplace but merely a “notice board.”
Hearing the matter on Wednesday, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav asked Meta to explain how the CCPA’s order could be considered “without jurisdiction” and also questioned why the issue should not be examined by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The court has listed the matter for further hearing on March 25.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Meta, contended that Facebook does not function like online marketplaces such as Amazon or Flipkart. He argued that the platform does not facilitate transactions or charge any commission, and therefore falls outside the scope of e-commerce regulation.
“We are not providing virtual Khan Market. This is a notice board meant only for Facebook users. We are not a shop. No commercial sales are allowed. No consideration is charged. We don’t charge anybody,” Rohatgi submitted.
He further explained that Facebook Marketplace only enables users to connect with each other, without providing any mechanism for completing transactions. According to Meta, the service is intended for individuals to sell or exchange goods in a personal capacity, and commercial sellers are not permitted.
The dispute stems from a January 1, 2026 order by the CCPA, which held that Meta had violated provisions of the Consumer Protection Act and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules. The authority found that Facebook Marketplace allowed listings of walkie-talkies without mandatory disclosures and regulatory compliance.
The CCPA also directed Meta to ensure that products requiring statutory approval or certification are not listed or sold on its platform without adherence to applicable laws. It further asked the company to conduct periodic self-audits to identify deceptive listings and publish compliance certificates for public awareness.
In its petition, Meta has argued that the CCPA exceeded its jurisdiction by treating Facebook Marketplace as an e-commerce platform. It described the authority’s interpretation as “untenable” and inconsistent with the statutory framework.
The company warned that such an interpretation could expand the scope of e-commerce rules to virtually all digital platforms hosting user-generated listings, including online newspapers and community forums.
“To circumvent the plain language of the E-Commerce Rules… any digital platform that hosts repeated listings of regulated goods is brought within the E-Commerce Rules,” the petition stated, adding that this would impose regulatory burdens on individuals selling everyday items in a personal capacity.
Meta also alleged that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and encroached upon matters governed by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
The action against Meta is part of a wider regulatory exercise initiated by the CCPA, which had taken suo motu cognisance of large-scale illegal listings of walkie-talkies across online platforms.
The authority identified over 16,970 non-compliant listings and issued notices to 13 e-commerce entities, including Amazon, Flipkart, Meesho, JioMart, and Meta, before imposing penalties.
The High Court will now examine whether Facebook Marketplace can be regulated under the e-commerce framework and whether the CCPA had jurisdiction to impose the penalty.
