- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
ISPs Seek Legal View On DoT's Demand For Statutory Dues Based On Supreme Court’s Adjusted Gross Revenue Order
[ By Bobby Anthony ]The Internet Service Providers Association of India (ISPAI) has stated that it plans to seek the legal view on the applicability of the Supreme Court's recent Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR) ruling on internet service providers.According to the ISPAI, the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) has unnecessarily imposed the order on internet service providers.It may be...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Internet Service Providers Association of India (ISPAI) has stated that it plans to seek the legal view on the applicability of the Supreme Court's recent Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR) ruling on internet service providers.
According to the ISPAI, the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) has unnecessarily imposed the order on internet service providers.
It may be recalled that earlier, the DoT directed telecom operators, as well as internet service providers to make payment in accordance with the recent SC order and submit requisite documents to ensure compliance within the stipulated timeframe.
Faced with DoT’s directive to pay up, the ISPAI had written to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) seeking intervention on the issue of the applicability of the recent SC judgment on internet service providers. The ISPAI had contended that paying up would “lead to huge financial crisis in many companies especially small as medium internet service providers spread across the country in rural areas”.
The ISPAI had argued that implementation of the SC AGR order on licensees who were not even parties in the dispute before telecom tribunal and SC would not be desirable.
The Communications Ministry had asserted that the SC ruling applies to any company which utilizes radio waves and has a telecom license, implying that statutory dues from service providers could swell beyond Rs 3 lakh crore.
The Supreme Court had upheld the government's position on including revenue from non-telecom businesses in calculating the annual AGR of telecom companies, a share of which is paid as license and spectrum charges.