{"id":235177,"date":"2020-09-01T21:32:56","date_gmt":"2020-09-01T16:02:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=235177"},"modified":"2020-09-04T10:56:38","modified_gmt":"2020-09-04T05:26:38","slug":"sc-gives-10-years-time-to-telecos-to-pay-agr-dues","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/09\/01\/sc-gives-10-years-time-to-telecos-to-pay-agr-dues\/","title":{"rendered":"SC gives 10 years’ time to Telecos to pay AGR dues"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court<\/strong>: Asking Telecom Operators to make the payment of 10% of the total AGR dues as by 31.3.2021, the 3-judge bench of Arun Mishra, SA Nazeer and MR Shah, JJ gave 10 years to the Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) to complete the payment of their AGR dues.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe TSPs make payment in yearly instalments commencing from 1.4.2021 up to 31.3.2031 payable by 31st March of every succeeding financial year.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Union of India on the representation made by the telecom service providers and Indian Banks’ Association, had decided to provide the facility of making payment in instalments within 20 years. The Court, however, said that the period of 20 years fixed for payment is excessive<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026 it is a revenue sharing regime, and it is grant of sovereign right to the TSPs. under the Telecom Policy. We feel that some reasonable time is to be granted, considering the financial stress and the banking sector’s involvement. We deem it appropriate to grant facility of time to make payment of dues in equal yearly instalments.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Court, however, clarified that at the same time, it is to be ensured that the dues are paid in toto.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe concession is granted only on the condition that the dues shall be paid punctually within the time stipulated by this Court. Even a single default will attract the dues along with interest, penalty and interest on penalty at the rate specified in the agreement.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Court noticed that the decision of the Cabinet is based on the various factors, and in the interest of the economy and the consumers. The decision is taken after extensive deliberations and consultations, and till the date of judgment, the dues have been worked out as per the decision rendered by this Court. Only for the subsequent period, some relaxation has been given as to the rate of interest, penalty, and interest on penalty, which is permissible.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe arrears have accumulated for the last 20 years. It is also to be noted that some of the companies are under insolvency proceedings, validity of which is to be examined, and they were having huge arrears of AGR dues against them.\u00a0 For protecting the telecom sector, a decision has been taken on various considerations mentioned above, which cannot be objected to.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Last year, in\u00a0Union of India v. Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India,\u00a02019 SCC OnLine SC 1393<\/a>,\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>the bench of Arun Mishra, SA Nazeer and MR Shah, JJ had\u00a0refused to change the definition of gross revenue as defined in clause 19.1 of the licence agreement granted by the Government of India to the Telecom Service Providers<\/a>. It had held,<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cThe definition in agreement is unambiguous, clear, and beyond the pale of doubt, and there is no confusion in the definition of gross revenue, which is the basis for realisation of the licence fee. Licensees have made a futile attempt to wriggle out of the definition in an indirect method, which was rejected directly in the decision of 2011 between the parties and it was held that these very heads form part of gross revenue.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The Court, hence, noticed that is clear that in the case, which was decided by this Court relating to AGR dues, respondents were the parties, and they were litigating with respect to the definition of AGR in the second round of appeal filed before this Court.\u00a0 Each of them was aware that the dispute as to the definition of AGR was pending in this Court. Thus, it is apparent that it was known to the parties that AGR dues to be finalised as per the decision of this Court in a pending matter, and lis was pending for the last 20 years.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe liability cannot be escaped as specified in the Trading Guidelines to the extent that the seller or buyer is liable. They have to pay the AGR as per the judgment rendered by this Court. The purchasers who are not seller or buyer, shall have to pay the dues to the extent they are liable under the Guidelines, as discussed above.\u201d<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

On the submission that they have paid dues as per the self-assessment or, in some cases, demands have not been raised, the Court directed DoT to complete the assessment in such cases of trade and raise demand if it has not been raised and to examine the correctness of self-assessment and raise demand, if necessary, after due verification.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn\u00a0 case demand notice has not been issued, let DoT raise the demand within six weeks from today.\u201d<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Court, hence, issued the following directions:<\/strong><\/p>\n