India’s vast consumer market offers room for growth, but CA Ashish Parakh says large industrial houses should focus on capital-intensive sectors instead of entering trades that sustain small entrepreneurs

Bhopal/ Gwalior, September 6, 2026

Reliance Consumer Products Limited has entered India’s ice cream market with its new brand, Bombay Creamery. Its products start at Rs 10 and include cups, cones, bars, sticks and tubs. The launch has brought a major industrial house into another everyday consumer segment.

The company has positioned Bombay Creamery as an affordable brand made with real dairy cream. T. Krishnakumar, Director of Reliance Consumer Products, said the company was making a long-term commitment to the category and wanted to offer real ice cream at a price every Indian family could afford. The products have initially been launched in western India, with a wider national rollout planned. Reliance Industries’ announcement

The entry may appear to be another business expansion in India’s fast-growing consumer market. However, Chartered Accountant and senior consultant Ashish Parakh believes it raises a much larger economic and social question. In an exclusive conversation with Swadesh, Parakh said the debate was not about Reliance alone. It was about whether every profitable consumer segment in a country of nearly 150 crore people should eventually come under a few large industrial groups.

“A Rs 10 ice cream is undoubtedly attractive to the consumer,” Parakh said. “But if this price is achieved through the enormous capital strength, distribution network and market reach of a large corporate house, its impact on small producers and vendors must also be examined.”

A market of nearly 150 crore consumers

India is one of the world’s largest consumer markets. Rising incomes, urbanisation, digital payments and improved transport have opened new opportunities across food, beverages, clothing, healthcare, tourism, retail and personal services.

The country’s retail sector was estimated at nearly $1.1 trillion in 2025 and is projected to expand rapidly over the coming years. This growth offers space for both organised companies and millions of small enterprises.

Parakh said no law could prevent a company from conducting a legitimate business, investing capital or offering consumers a product at a competitive price. The real issue was the manner in which the country’s biggest industrial groups used their financial and market strength.

India needs large industrial houses in sectors requiring substantial investment and advanced capabilities. These include semiconductors, aviation, defence production, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, medical research and modern infrastructure.

Such projects involve high risks and long development periods. Only large companies may have the capital, managerial strength and technological capacity to undertake them. The position becomes different, Parakh argued, when the same industrial houses enter low-investment businesses that traditionally provide self-employment to ordinary families.

When an elephant enters a pond

Parakh compared the situation to an elephant entering a pond. The elephant and the smaller creatures may both need water, but their presence in the same limited space cannot have the same effect. A small ice cream producer operates with limited capital. The business may support the owner’s family, a few workers, local milk suppliers, transporters and street vendors. Its production capacity, advertising reach and ability to absorb losses remain limited.

A large industrial group enters the same market with centralised production, bulk procurement, established retail outlets and a nationwide distribution network. It can spend heavily on promotion and keep prices low for a considerable period.

A Rs 10 ice cream may benefit the consumer immediately. The larger question is whether independent producers will remain in the market after five or ten years if a capital-rich company continues to operate at extremely low margins.

Parakh said Indian competition law did not consider the success or size of a company an offence. However, the use of a dominant position, below-cost pricing intended to remove competitors, or denial of market access can become a matter of regulatory examination.

The Competition Commission of India recognises unfair pricing, predatory pricing and the use of dominance in one market to gain an advantage in another as possible competition concerns. Each case, however, requires evidence and examination of the relevant market.

Industry or entrepreneurship?

Parakh said the government must ask whether its role was limited to creating powerful industrialists or also included protecting grassroots entrepreneurship. Large industries are important for production, exports, technology and employment. But small enterprises are equally important because they distribute income across families, towns and villages.

India’s micro, small and medium enterprises (MSME) provide employment to around 11 crore people. They remain the country’s largest source of employment after agriculture and play an important role in manufacturing, services and exports.

Parakh said certain livelihood-sensitive businesses could be identified after consultation with trade bodies, small entrepreneurs, economists and competition experts. “Large industrial houses should be discouraged from entering businesses that require little capital but sustain a large number of families,” he said. “The government may consider clear safeguards or limited reservations for such livelihood-based sectors.”

He clarified that such protection should not become a shield for inefficiency. Small businesses must also improve hygiene, quality, packaging, technology and customer service. Consumers cannot be asked to pay more merely to preserve an outdated or poor-quality business model.

A balanced framework could include fair-pricing checks, access to affordable credit, common production facilities, cooperative marketing and digital support for small enterprises. Any restrictions must apply equally and transparently rather than favour selected companies.

Corporate growth and social responsibility

Parakh also linked the issue to the wider idea of responsible business. Large companies have every right to expand and earn profits. But their choice of sector carries an economic and moral responsibility when millions depend on small trades for survival.

He referred to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s call for Indian families to hold weddings within the country so that spending benefits local hotels, caterers, artisans, transporters and service providers. The wider message, Parakh said, was to keep economic activity within local communities and spread its benefits among more people.

India’s growing consumer economy needs both large companies and small enterprises. The real test is whether the expansion of organised business also leaves enough space for ordinary entrepreneurs to grow.