India has mounted a strong legal defence of its revised antitrust penalty framework, telling the Delhi High Court that fines linked to a company’s global turnover are essential to deter anti-competitive conduct by multinational corporations, in its ongoing dispute with Apple.
The Competition Commission of India has opposed Apple’s challenge to a 2024 legislative amendment that clarifies how penalties are to be calculated in competition law cases. The amendment allows fines to be assessed on the basis of global turnover rather than revenue generated only within India. Apple has argued that this approach is excessive and legally disproportionate, particularly where alleged violations are confined to the Indian market.
In a court filing dated 15 December, reviewed by open sources, the competition regulator stated that the law brings Indian enforcement standards in line with established international practice, including the European Union. According to the regulator, relying solely on India-specific turnover, especially in cases involving global digital platforms, risks rendering penalties ineffective and incapable of influencing corporate behaviour.
The regulator told the court that penalties must retain genuine deterrent value in complex digital markets dominated by large multinational enterprises. It added that fines based only on local revenue could easily be absorbed as a cost of doing business, undermining the objectives of competition law.
Apple moved the court in November seeking to strike down the amendment, warning that its potential exposure could rise sharply if global turnover is used as the benchmark. The company has said that it could face a penalty of up to 38 billion dollars following a competition authority finding that it abused its dominant position through its app store practices. Apple has denied all allegations of wrongdoing.
The legal dispute also centres on Apple’s claim that the competition authority is applying the amended law retrospectively. The regulator has rejected this argument, stating that it has always possessed the statutory power to impose penalties of up to ten percent of a company’s turnover. The amendment, it said, merely clarifies how turnover is to be understood.
The competition authority further accused Apple of attempting to mislead the court, noting that it has sought only India specific financial data during its investigation, despite having the power to examine global figures. Apple maintains that the information sought could nonetheless expose it to significantly higher penalties under the revised framework.
The outcome of the case is expected to have wide implications for other multinational companies facing antitrust scrutiny in India. The Delhi High Court is scheduled to hear the matter on 27 January.