Vodafone Idea Agr Dues: Court Asks For Resolution

The High Court on Friday asked the government to bring “finality” to Vodafone Concept’s (Vi) issue, even as it agreed to hear the cash-strapped telecom firm’s application seeking subduing of the Division of Telecommunications’ move to increase an extra need of Rs 9,450 crore towards Readjusted gross Revenue (AGR) associated charges until FY19.

SC Intervention on Vi’s Financial Woes

The Supreme Court has actually urged the government to solve Vodafone Concept’s (Vi) monetary problems, consenting to assess Vi’s application against the Department of Telecom’ (DoT) need for Rs 9,450 crore in added AGR fees. The government, holding a 49% equity risk, seeks even more time to discover a remedy. The court has actually set up a more hearing for September 26.

AGR Dues Discrepancies Highlighted

The DoT had then approximated VI’s dues at Rs 58,300 crore, but the telco had actually self-assessed the dues at Rs 21,500 crore and has up until now paid Rs 7,900 crore. Bharti Airtel’s fees, as per the DoT, stood at Rs 44,000 crore, compared to the driver’s own assessment of around Rs 13,000 crore. Bharti Airtel has until now paid Rs 18,000 crore, including a Rs 5,000-crore ad hoc payment.

In this sum of roughly Rs 9450 crore, the bulk amount of approximately Rs 5606 crore (as on March 31, 2025) is for the period up to FY 2016-17 which has actually currently been crystalised by the court. The DoT had actually after that approximated VI’s dues at Rs 58,300 crore, however the telco had actually self-assessed the dues at Rs 21,500 crore and has actually so far paid Rs 7,900 crore. Bharti Airtel’s fees, as per the DoT, stood at Rs 44,000 crore, contrasted with the operator’s very own analysis of around Rs 13,000 crore.

Breakdown of AGR Fee Components

Of the overall Rs 1.47 lakh crore of AGR fees, which the telecom drivers were required to pay by January 2020 as an outcome of the peak court’s order, virtually 75% consisted of rate of interest, charge and rate of interest on penalty, the firms claimed. The permit charge charges amounted to Rs 92,642 crore while the range usage charge was Rs 55,054 crore, based on the order of September 2020.

Vi has actually declared that despite the apex court having actually crystallised all the obligations in respect of AGR on Vi till FY17, the department has been increasing extra need for that period stating that the dues claimed were above and past the AGR dues.

The SC had on September 19 in 2015 disregarded a batch of medicinal requests submitted by telcos versus charge of charge and passion on penalty in its September 2019 order, along with an improvement in what the afflicted providers asserted were arithmetical mistakes in the DoT’s calculations.

In this sum of roughly Rs 9450 crore, the majority amount of about Rs 5606 crore (as on March 31, 2025) is through up to FY 2016-17 which has actually currently been crystalised by the court. The extra need pertains only to license cost dues. If additional SUC demands for the period up to FY 2016-17 are likewise considered, the quantity is approximately Rs 6800 crore (as on March 31, 2025), the application specified.

Government’s Stake in Vodafone Idea

“I need to inform this court that the government of India has 49% equity in the business and is as a result, likewise a stakeholder in the problem,” the SG stated, including that now the circumstances have transformed and the parties intend to locate an option at the earliest, therefore, requested for one more date to hear the Vi request.

DoT’s Letter to Vodafone Idea

“DoT carried August 13 provided one more letter to Vodafone pertaining to the outstanding certificate fee charges (as much as FY 2018-19) covered in the postponement and allegedly not tabulated in the SC order of September 1, 2020. A sum of around Rs 9450 crore has actually been computed by the DoT which is to be thought about with recommendation to the scheduled repayment due on March 31, 2026.”

“The claims currently being made by the DoT, which are in extra of Rs 5960 crore are clearly a sign of the truth that also according to the DoT, specific needs were missed out or are being changed on account of departmental evaluations,” it stated.

It said the additional need increased by DoT in respect of AGR runs counter to the apex court’s judgment of July 20, 2020, and a subsequent order of September 1, 2020. It declared that the greatest court had restricted re-assessment of the AGR dues, and, therefore, the DoT’s relocation was “unjustified, arbitrary and unfair.”