AGR Issue Chronology

  1. 22nd July 1999 – Operators Signed the Migration Package of DoT
  2. 1st Aug 1999 – Cut off date for Change Over to NTP-99
  3. 6th Oct 1999 – Date of appointment of the Consultant by DoT
  4. 15th Nov 1999 – TRAI GMPCS Recommendation
    1. Gross Revenue is revenue by way of operation of GMPCS service
    2. No double counting of telecom turnover for LF calculation
    3. Handsets, USO fund, taxes should be netted out for LF calculation
  5. 23rd June 2000 – TRAI CMS Recommendation
    1. Gross Revenue is revenue by way of operation of CMS service
    2. IUC, roaming, service tax, sale of handsets netted out of LF calculation
  6. 31st Aug 2000 – TRAI BSO Recommendation
    1. Same as above
  7. 31st Oct 2000 – TRAI’s Response to DoT’s Back Reference
    1. DOT’s Comments – Proposes to include revenue from non-license activities
    2. TRAI’s Response – Reiterates to include rev from only licensed activities
  8. 21st May 2001 – DoT finalised the concept of Gross Revenue
  9. 1st April 2002 – DoT spelt out changes in license conditions
  10. 19th May 2003 – AUSPI filed Petition 7 of 2003 in TDSAT
  11. 7th July 2006 – TDSAT’s Judgment
    1. Revenue from non-licensed activities not part of Gross Revenue
    2. Remanded the matter to TRAI for an effective consultation
  12. 13th Sept 2006 – TRAI Recommendation
    1. Recommended portions of revenue to be included and excluded
  13. Oct 2006 – DoT filed a petition in Supreme Court
  14. 19th Jan 2007 – Supreme Court Order (On DoT’s Petition)
    1. No Reason to Interfere on account of TDSAT proceedings
    2. DoT given liberty to urge all the contention before TDSAT
  15. 13th Feb 2007 – DoT filed objections to TRAI’s recommendation before TDSAT
  16. 30th Aug 2007 – TDSAT’s Judgment
    1. TDSAT agreed to most of TRAI’s recommendations
  17. 30th Oct 2007 – DoT filed an appeal to SC (5059 of 2007)
  18. 4th Dec 2007 – AUSPI appealed against TDSAT order in SC (CA 179-180 of 2007)
    1. Against TDSAT judgment that date of relief will be from the date of the petition
  19. 11th Nov 2011 – SC Judgment (AUSPI case)
    1. TDSAT has no jurisdiction to decide non-telecom rev on part of GR
    2. TDSAT has jurisdiction to decide any dispute between licensee and licensor
  20. Feb 2012 – Operators challenged all demands of DoT in TDSAT
  21. 23rd April 2015 – TDSAT’s Judgment
    1.  Revenue is no different from what is defined in AS-9
    2. All revenues including non-telecom will be included in GR
    3. All revenues that are included in clause 19.1 of the license agreement
    4. All revenues that are excluded that are in clause 19.2 of license
    5. Capital receipts are different from the revenue
    6. Revenue cannot be subjected to double charge
    7. No one can charge revenue from oneself
    8. One can not treat someone else’s revenue as his own
  22. 23rd July 2015 – DoT filed an appeal in SC against TDSAT order
  23. 24th Oct 2019 – SC Judgment
    1. Overturned TDSAT judgment totally
    2. Established DoT’s right to collect revenue from non-license activities
    3. Revenue is as per contract and AS-9 is only for accounting purpose
    4. Established DoT’s right to impose interests and penalties