Meesho has been served a tax demand of approximately ₹1,499.74 crore by the Income Tax Department for the assessment year 2023–24, following a review of the company’s filings. The demand, which includes interest, arises from adjustments made by tax authorities during their assessment of Meesho’s financial records.
Company response and likely next steps
Meesho has rejected the adjustments underlying the demand and said it will legally contest the order. Company sources indicated the management is reviewing the assessment and expects to pursue available appellate and judicial remedies. Meesho also does not anticipate an immediate material impact on its business operations.
Context: previous disputes and regulatory scrutiny
This is not the first major tax dispute for Meesho. The company faced a similar demand for the 2022–23 assessment year, for which the Karnataka High Court had granted interim relief by staying the order while the matter was adjudicated. Such recurring notices reflect intensified scrutiny of large digital marketplaces as tax authorities seek to clarify tax treatment for new business models.
Why marketplaces face complex tax issues
Online marketplaces typically involve multiple sellers, intermediated transactions and varied revenue streams—elements that complicate assessments of revenue recognition, commission structures and tax liabilities. These technical issues often lead to adjustments by tax authorities and protracted disputes resolved through appeals or court proceedings.
Meesho’s position in India’s e‑commerce landscape
Founded in 2015 by Vidit Aatrey and Sanjeev Barnwal, Meesho has grown into one of India’s prominent e‑commerce platforms, with strong traction in tier‑2 and tier‑3 cities. The company focuses on enabling small businesses and individual sellers to access consumers nationwide and has invested in logistics and digital infrastructure while attracting significant venture capital.
The outcome of the current demand will depend on the legal process, and Meesho has signalled its intention to defend its position through the statutory appeal mechanism and, if required, higher judicial forums.
