The stand was made clear at the Delhi High Court, which is hearing proceedings in a case centred around Apple’s alleged abuse of dominance in its App Store payment system. Apple is challenging the CCI’s rule that allows penalties based on global revenue.
On Friday, Apple indicated it will challenge the move to seek details of its domestic revenue.(removed too since Apple has not yet furnished global turnover).
At the hearing, the Delhi High Court paused the CCI’s final order against Apple until July 15, while allowing the regulator to continue proceedings.
Objecting to the CCI’s new move on domestic revenue, Apple told the Delhi High Court that the issue would be addressed in an affidavit it proposes to file in the ongoing High Court proceedings.
Appearing for Apple, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi said, “The request is in writing for global (revenue) and multi-product. His counter (the CCI’s counter affidavit) says to the contrary.”
Senior advocate Balbir Singh, appearing for the CCI, responded that the regulator had sought the information in accordance with its order.
The submission came after the CCI argued before the court that although Apple had challenged the amended penalty regime permitting fines based on global turnover, the regulator was currently seeking only details relating to the company’s domestic turnover.
The Cupertino, California-based company expressed dismay that the CCI was now asking for domestic revenue when the penalty was based on global revenue and added that its affidavit will “include this.”
A division bench of chief justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and justice Tejas Karia directed the CCI not to issue any final order in its investigation into alleged anti-competitive practices by Apple until the next hearing in July, while also asking the company to cooperate with the ongoing probe.
Declining to grant any further time to Apple for appearing before the CCI and furnishing information relating to its domestic turnover, the bench told the regulator, “Lay your hands off till July 15. Proceed with the matter. They will cooperate but you will not pass a final order.”
Recording the CCI’s statement, the court ordered that “no final decision shall be taken” until the matter is heard again in mid-July.
The proceedings arise from Apple’s challenge in November last year to the amendments to the Competition Act, 2002, and the 2024 Monetary Penalty Guidelines, which permit penalties to be calculated on the basis of global revenue instead of India-specific or product-specific revenue.
The amended provisions empower the CCI to impose fines of up to 10 per cent of a company’s global revenue from all products and services, replacing the earlier norm that restricted penalties to revenue generated from the specific product or service under scrutiny in India.
The law further provides that the average revenue of the preceding three financial years would be considered while calculating penalties. Apple argued that the amended framework could expose it to penalties amounting to nearly 38 billion dollars.
Singhvi told the court that the CCI had fixed the final hearing in the matter for May 21 even though Apple’s plea was already listed before the High Court on July 15.
He argued that permitting the regulator to proceed further would render Apple’s challenge to the global turnover framework “infructuous”.
CCI lawyer Singh submitted that the company had been delaying proceedings in a case pending since 2021.
“A multinational company is stalling a regulator’s hand in 2026,” Singh told the bench.
According to the regulator, Apple had failed to provide the required information despite being granted seven extensions, thereby preventing the adjudication proceedings from reaching a conclusion.
The CCI further submitted that the investigation had already been completed, the Director General’s report had been furnished to Apple, and the company was now expected to respond. The regulator said Apple was prolonging the matter through litigation.
The High Court observed that it could not, at this stage, compel Apple to disclose the disputed information without first examining whether the company was legally entitled to withhold it.
At the same time, it clarified that the CCI would remain free to draw adverse inferences or take such steps as permissible under the law if Apple failed to cooperate. It nevertheless directed that while proceedings before the CCI may continue, no final order should be passed before the next hearing.
The CCI’s investigation into Apple’s App Store payment policies stems from complaints filed between 2021 and 2022 by two non-government organisations, Indian Startups and Match Group.
The complainants alleged that Apple abused its dominant position by mandating the use of its in-app payment system and imposing commissions of up to 30 per cent, thereby restricting competition and limiting market access.
The regulator had earlier found a prima facie case of abuse of dominance and directed a detailed investigation by the Director General.
Apple subsequently approached the High Court in November last year after the CCI sought its global turnover financial statements, contending that imposing penalties for India-specific conduct on the basis of worldwide turnover was “arbitrary” and “grossly disproportionate”.
“The applicants’ maximum penalty exposure, i.e., at the rate of 10% of the applicants’ average global turnover derived from all of the applicants’ products/services globally for FY2022 to FY2024, could be approx USD ($) 38 billion. Any retrospective imposition of penalty on the applicants in terms of the Impugned Amended Penalty Provisions by the Respondent Commission would be manifestly arbitrary, irrational and grossly disproportionate, rendering the same to be ultra vires the provisions of Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” Apple said in its plea.
The company also argued that the CCI has no jurisdiction to consider its global turnover, describing such an interpretation as ultra vires the Competition Act.
“Section 32 of the Competition Act provides only for restricted extraterritorial operation of the Competition Act. The Respondent Commission (CCI) does not have any jurisdiction to consider products/services marketed beyond the territory of India, when the effect of any alleged anti-competitive behaviour is confined to such foreign territory,” Apple stated.
The company relied on the Supreme Court’s 2017 Excel Crop Care judgment to contend that penalties must be linked only to revenue earned from the infringing product or market, in line with the principle of proportionality.
Apple India reported revenue of Rs 79,378 crore for the financial year ended March 2025, up from Rs 67,122 crore in the previous year. Profit for FY25 stood at Rs 3,186 crore, compared with Rs 2,742 crore a year earlier, according to data from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.
