NEW DELHI — Apple is asking the Delhi High Court to curb India’s new approach to antitrust penalties before a Jan. 27 hearing, warning that a “global turnover” formula could turn a dispute over App Store conduct in India into an existential financial threat. The fight pits Apple’s proportionality argument against a government-backed push for tougher deterrence in digital markets, Jan. 8, 2026.
At the center is how India’s competition watchdog can calculate monetary penalties when it finds a company abused market power. Apple argues penalties should be tied to India-linked revenue (or to the turnover of the specific line of business under scrutiny), not to everything Apple sells worldwide. India’s Competition Commission of India (CCI) says the opposite: for global companies, a local-only base can make fines “nominal” and easy to absorb, undermining enforcement.
Apple and India’s global-turnover antitrust penalties
Apple’s petition challenges how amended rules are being used alongside the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2023, which strengthened enforcement tools and paved the way for penalty rules that can reference global turnover in certain calculations. (Read the act as published by PRS Legislative Research.)
The CCI’s more detailed methodology sits in its 2024 penalty framework, including the Monetary Penalty Guidelines, 2024. In court filings cited by Reuters, regulators argue the global-turnover concept aligns with international practice and better reflects harm and deterrence in cross-border, platform-driven markets.
Apple’s stakes are unusually high because the underlying dispute involves its iOS App Store model. A CCI investigation report has previously alleged Apple abused its position in India’s apps market, a claim Apple disputes. (See Reuters’ July 2024 reporting on the investigation report.)
Why Apple says the math is disproportionate
Apple’s core message to judges is simple: if the alleged conduct and impact are in India, the penalty base should not be Apple’s worldwide revenue. In its challenge, Apple has pointed to the theoretical exposure of about $38 billion if a maximum-type approach were applied off global turnover averages. Reuters detailed that risk and Apple’s argument that the regime is “grossly disproportionate” in a November filing story: Apple contests India’s antitrust penalty law with risk of $38 billion fine.
The watchdog’s reply, reported Thursday by Reuters, is that narrowing penalties to India turnover can fail to deter global digital firms and that “clarificatory” provisions can operate retrospectively because they explain legislative intent. Reuters also reported that the Delhi High Court is set to hear the dispute Jan. 27: India defends antitrust penalty law in Apple fight.
For Apple, the legal question is more than just a fight over one case. A ruling upholding the global-turnover approach could reshape how India fines large multinationals across sectors, while a ruling for Apple could pull enforcement back toward narrower, India-linked turnover math.
What happens next: The court has scheduled the matter for Jan. 27, according to court coverage that previewed the hearing date and issues in dispute: Delhi High Court defers hearing in Apple’s plea to Jan. 27.
Older context: India’s penalty debate has swung before. The Supreme Court previously emphasized “relevant turnover” principles in penalty reasoning (summarized here: Supreme Court order on “relevant turnover”). And India has shown willingness to levy meaningful Big Tech penalties, including a 2022 CCI fine against Google: India fines Google $113 million in second antitrust penalty.
