Apple stepped up its legal fight against India’s competition watchdog, accusing investigators of relying on complaints from rival companies instead of carrying out an independent investigation, reported Reuters. In a submission dated June 25, the iPhone maker asked the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to reject its investigation’s findings, saying the report copied arguments made by competitors and failed to properly assess the facts.
The submission, reviewed by Reuters, marks Apple’s strongest response so far in the anti-trust case that has been under review for more than two years. The company denied allegations that it abused its position through the App Store on its iOS operating system by forcing app developers to use Apple’s own payment system.
Apple said it holds less than 6% of India’s smartphone market and that investigators ignored this fact when reaching their conclusions. The company described itself as “a minuscule player” in the country’s smartphone market and said the findings relied heavily on statements made by rivals instead of the regulator’s own analysis, reported Reuters.
Why is Apple challenging CCI investigation?
Apple stated that the Director General, the CCI’s investigation arm, failed to independently verify several allegations made by companies such as Match Group, PhonePe and Paytm. According to the submission, investigators simply repeated those claims without carrying out their own examination. “The DG made no effort whatsoever to independently verify or critically assess these statements, often parroting them verbatim,” Apple said in its filing, as reported by Reuters.
To support its argument, Apple included comparison tables that, according to the company, showed similarities between the investigation report and submissions made by its rivals.
Apple also questioned the use of material from a European Union competition ruling against the company. It said the Indian investigation “blindly replicated” a graphic on global consumer spending in mobile apps and games from the European case even though market conditions in India are different.
A Reuters review found that both the European ruling and the Indian investigation cited data from research firm Statista in their footnotes.
Apple warned that any order requiring changes to the App Store could affect its business operations, Reuters reported. “Any forced alterations to Apple’s carefully designed App Store could disrupt its integrated business model,” the company said.
It also said that penalties or mandatory changes would create uncertainty for businesses and discourage investment in India’s digital economy. “The imposition of remedies would create regulatory uncertainty and could deter investments in India’s digital economy,” Apple said.
Apple’s argument comes after Google failed to convince Indian regulators using similar claims in its own anti-trust battle. In that case, Google stated that the CCI’s order could hurt innovation and growth, but the company was later required to change how it manages and promotes Android in India. The CCI is scheduled to hold a closed-door hearing with all parties in the case on July 21, reported Reuters.
Apple’s allegations
The competition watchdog has accused Apple of delaying proceedings by taking over two years to respond to the investigation report while also challenging India’s antitrust penalty framework through separate legal action.
Indian law allows the CCI to impose penalties of up to 10% of a company’s turnover over the previous three financial years, reported Reuters. The regulator has not disclosed which revenue figures it may use if it decides to impose a fine. Apple said it has already submitted details of its relevant turnover in India for the financial years 2022 to 2024.
The company also said that investigators denied it a fair opportunity to defend itself.
Apple said it did not receive “a single opportunity to record its statements and provide oral evidence” during the investigation. It compared its treatment with Google’s Android case, where company officials were given several chances to present their business model before regulators.
Competition lawyer Gautam Shahi of Dua Associates said the law does not necessarily require investigators to offer an oral hearing, reported Reuters. “While desirable, the CCI’s investigation team is under no legal obligation to give an oral hearing if it feels it has conclusive evidence,” he said.
He added that the final decision now rests with CCI members, who will determine whether Apple should have been given that opportunity.
The case comes at an important time for Apple’s business in India. The company is expanding iPhone manufacturing in the country as it reduces its dependence on China. According to Counterpoint Research, India is expected to produce 26% of the world’s iPhones in 2026, up from just 6% four years ago, reported Reuters.
Apple also urged the regulator to consider its contribution to the Indian economy if penalties are imposed. The company said it has maintained an “unblemished record” and exported iPhones worth $51 billion from India over the past five years, reported Reuters.