NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 2026 demand before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), which subsequently stayed the demand and restrained DoT from taking any coercive recovery action against the Company. Subsequently, in FY 2019-20, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Union of India v. Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India, (2020) 3 SCC 525 ("AGR Judgment"), upheld DoT's interpretation of Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR), affirmed that AGR includes revenue from both licensed as well as unlicensed activities. Pursuant to the Supreme Court ruling, DoT issued revised demand notices dated December 23, 2019, March 05, 2020 and July 15, 2022, amounting to 15,020 crores, 16,359 crores and 21,370 crores, respectively. The demand period was retrospectively extended to encompass the period FY 2005-06 through FY 2019-20. Aggrieved by these revised demands, the Company submitted representations to DoT on January 06, 2020, February 21, 2020, April 03, 2020 and March 04, 2022, requesting reconsideration and withdrawal of the demands. In its representations, the Company underscored that revenues from its Fertilizers & Chemicals business, which is entirely unrelated to VSAT and ISP-IT Licenses, should not be included in computation of AGR and License Fees. Subsequent legal & regulatory developments, such as distinction between non-Telecom PSUs and Core Telecom Companies, duly recognized by both DoT and the Hon’ble Supreme Court; the TDSAT Judgment in the case of Union of India Vs M/s Netmagic Solutions Pvt. Ltd, Civil Appeal 9012/2022 (“Netmagic Judgment”) and; the 2021 Telecom Reforms, have carved out several exceptions to the interpretation of the term “AGR” and computation of AGR and the License Fees. These exceptions provide critical relief, particularly for the similar category of licensees and the non-telecom / nonlicensed revenue streams. Based on a detailed and meticulous legal assessment in consultation with eminent Senior Advocates, the Company firmly believes that it has strong grounds to contest the demands raised by DoT. Consequently, the Company has neither provided for this amount in its books of account nor recognized it under contingent liability.
50 Annual Report 2025-2026 | 323