'Better late than never': Why did F1 leave India, and why is it back on the agenda?

The Indian Grand Prix was India’s round of the Formula 1 world championship. It brought the country’s major international racing event to the Buddh International Circuit, a purpose-built venue designed for top-level motorsport. Its importance went beyond racing because it tested whether India could host a global sporting property successfully.

The circuit was built in 2011 and designed by German engineer Hermann Tilke. India hosted the Grand Prix there from 2011 through 2013. Sebastian Vettel won the 2013 race, completing three victories at the circuit and securing his fourth Formula 1 world championship on the same day.

The 2013 event became India’s last Formula 1 race. The government is now examining whether the country could host another Grand Prix, with a possible return targeted for 2028. Any comeback would depend on policy, taxation, clearances, funding and a workable agreement with Formula 1.

India hosted three Formula 1 races in total. They took place at the Buddh International Circuit from 2011 to 2013. The short run made the event a notable but brief chapter in India’s international sporting history.

The final race was held in 2013. Sebastian Vettel won it, completing a hat-trick of victories at the circuit and sealing his fourth Formula 1 world championship. The event did not return in 2014, and it later disappeared from the Formula 1 calendar amid a tax dispute.

The article describes the government’s renewed effort as coming 13 years after the last race. A Sports Ministry task force is assessing whether India could return by 2028. It will review past problems, the current motorsports ecosystem and the practical feasibility of hosting Formula 1 again.

The Indian Grand Prix was suspended in 2014 and later disappeared from the Formula 1 calendar amid a tax dispute. The central issue was how Indian law should classify Formula 1 and its commercial activities. That classification affected the event’s tax exemptions, customs duties and financial arrangements.

The dispute also involved Formula 1’s commercial rights structure, the race promoter and the movement of equipment across international borders. In 2017, the Supreme Court ruled that Formula 1’s commercial rights company had a permanent establishment in India. Income linked to its Indian operations therefore became taxable. Liberty Media later reportedly set aside USD 14.8 million to settle the liability.

The problem was broader than the cost of staging a race. Tax treatment, cross-border logistics and contractual obligations created major obstacles. The government’s new task force is reviewing those past difficulties before considering a possible return by 2028.

Indian authorities and Formula 1 disagreed because the event’s legal classification had direct financial consequences. If Formula 1 was treated as a sport rather than entertainment, different tax exemptions and obligations could apply. The issue mattered because the race involved international companies, overseas equipment and payments between the promoter and Formula 1’s commercial rights holder.

The classification question was part of a wider dispute over how Formula 1 operated in India. It affected customs duties, income linked to Indian activities and the commercial structure surrounding the race. The 2017 Supreme Court ruling later found that the commercial rights company had a permanent establishment in India, making related income taxable.

That ruling complicated the event’s financial position. It helped produce a reported USD 14.8 million tax settlement provision by Liberty Media. The episode showed that a suitable circuit was not enough; India also needed tax rules and contracts compatible with Formula 1’s international business model.

The Supreme Court’s ruling changed the tax position surrounding Formula 1 in India. By finding that the commercial rights company had a permanent establishment in the country, the court established that the company had a taxable business presence there. This made income connected with its Indian operations subject to Indian tax.

The decision mattered because Formula 1’s Indian race involved a global commercial rights holder, a local promoter and international business activity. The ruling complicated the financial obligations attached to the Grand Prix. It also reinforced the broader dispute over taxation, customs and the legal treatment of Formula 1’s commercial activities.

Liberty Media acquired Formula 1’s commercial rights in 2017 and reportedly set aside USD 14.8 million to settle the tax liability. The ruling did not simply concern one race-day bill. It exposed the need for clearer, workable arrangements before India could host another international Grand Prix.

The government can shape policy, taxation and approvals, but it cannot alone stage a Formula 1 race. A new Grand Prix would require Formula 1’s commercial rights holder, an event promoter and sufficient financial backing. The article does not name a future promoter or funder, but it identifies these commercial and organisational needs clearly.

The arrangement would have to cover the event’s costs and responsibilities. It would need to address the relationship between Formula 1 and the promoter, the movement of equipment, operational clearances and the tax treatment of international business. These issues were central to the earlier dispute and cannot be separated from race organisation.

The task force is examining how India can move forward. Its work includes reviewing the motorsports ecosystem and past challenges. A possible return by 2028 would depend on a sustainable agreement with Formula 1, manageable costs, necessary funding and rules that support the event.

An international sporting event is a connected business system, not just a competition at a venue. Formula 1 brings overseas companies, equipment, money and contractual obligations into one country. If tax rules, customs procedures or operational approvals conflict with that system, costs and legal uncertainty can make the event difficult to sustain.

India’s earlier race showed how this works. Authorities questioned whether Formula 1 was sport or entertainment, affecting tax exemptions and customs duties. Equipment had to cross borders, while payments flowed between the race promoter and Formula 1’s commercial rights holder. The Supreme Court later found a permanent establishment in India, making related income taxable.

These issues created obligations beyond building the Buddh International Circuit. The new task force is reviewing taxation, policy, clearances and the wider motorsports ecosystem. A future Grand Prix would need rules and contracts designed for international operations, not only a suitable track and enthusiastic fans.