- 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
- 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
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
[ By Bobby Anthony ]The Supreme Court will take up in-chambers, all petitions seeking review of its verdict on the Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR), which allowed central government’s plea to recover Rs 92,000 crore from telecom companies shortly.A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra and comprising Justice S A Nazeer and Justice M R Shah will consider the review petitions of the telecom...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Supreme Court will take up in-chambers, all petitions seeking review of its verdict on the Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR), which allowed central government’s plea to recover Rs 92,000 crore from telecom companies shortly.
A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra and comprising Justice S A Nazeer and Justice M R Shah will consider the review petitions of the telecom operators, though, Vodafone Idea and Bharti Airtel had sought an open court hearing on their pleas.
The review petitions were mentioned before Justice Arun Mishra after the court reopened after vacations. Justice Mishra had said he would speak with the Chief Justice S A Bobde on the matter.
In the in-chamber review, the petitions are circulated among the judges on the bench and there is no lawyer to argue the matter.
Telecom firms are supposed to pay Rs 92,000 crore in dues by January 23 following the court order in October last year.
The Supreme Court had ordered telecom firms, including Bharti Airtel Ltd. and Vodafone Idea Ltd., to pay the government as much as Rs 92,000 crore (USD 13 billion) in dues, which include penalties and interest.
In the verdict, a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had said telcom companies will have to shell out the dues. The Department of Telecom's (DoT) total demand is estimated around Rs 92,000 crore.
“We allow the appeals by the DoT. The gross revenue will prevail as defined as gross revenue,” said the court, citing no further exercise should take place in connection with re-calculations regarding the dues.
The Supreme Court specified that there should not be any further litigation on the matter. The apex court also passed a separate order on the specific time frame for the telecom companies to pay their dues.