The Delhi High Court has stepped into a high-stakes legal battle between Apple Inc. and India’s antitrust watchdog, seeking a formal response from the Centre and the Competition Commission of India (CCI). On Monday, the court heard Apple’s plea challenging a controversial amendment to the Competition Act, which allows penalties to be calculated based on a company’s total global turnover rather than earnings from specific relevant markets.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela issued notices to the Union Ministry of Corporate Affairs and the CCI, directing them to file reply affidavits within a week.
At the center of Apple’s petition is the amended Competition Act, 2002. The new provisions empower the CCI to impose penalties of up to 10% of an enterprise’s average turnover for the preceding three financial years if found guilty of anti-competitive conduct or abuse of dominance.
Crucially, Apple argues that the amendment allows the regulator to aggregate turnover from all products and services globally, rather than limiting the calculation to the “relevant product” or the “relevant geographic market” (India).
According to Apple’s petition, this shift drastically changes the landscape of liability. The tech giant estimated that its maximum penalty exposure—calculated at 10% of its average global turnover from 2022 to 2024—could amount to approximately USD 38 billion.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing Apple, argued that the provision is “manifestly arbitrary, unconstitutional, and grossly disproportionate.”
Singhvi contended that if a multi-product corporation is investigated for abuse of dominance regarding a single product, the penalty should logically remain tethered to that infringing product sold within India. He argued that factoring in global revenue generated from territories outside the CCI’s jurisdiction creates an unfair penalty structure.
Additionally, Apple noted that authorities had demanded the submission of its India turnover by December 8, a deadline the company claims is impossible to meet due to the time required to collate the data.
During the proceedings, the High Court expressed skepticism regarding the breadth of the amended law. The bench sought a prima facie explanation from the government on how penalties based on global turnover could be justified if the alleged abuse relates to only one of a company’s many products.
“Please tell us, prima facie, if the CCI initiates proceedings in relation to one product. How can you take into account turnover with respect to other products? Does it not appear very unreasonable to include other products?” the court asked.
Senior Advocate Balbir Singh, appearing for the government and the CCI, defended the amendment, stating the “global turnover concept” was introduced to ensure that entities with no physical base or turnover recorded specifically in India could still be brought under the regulatory net.
Singh pushed back against Apple’s plea, characterizing it as an attempt to “scuttle” the ongoing CCI probe. He clarified that, for the moment, authorities have only asked the company to provide its India-specific turnover by December 8, after which the agency would require 3-4 weeks to examine the information.
The High Court has listed the matter for a detailed hearing on December 16. The Centre and the CCI must submit their responses prior to this date, setting the stage for a significant ruling on how multinational corporations are penalized under Indian competition law.
