Unified License Agreement Dot

– entry fee: for the provision of all services, a non-refundable single entry fee of 15 points should be paid, although licensees can only pay registration fees for certain services. Our view: licenses should be separated from the spectrum. Just because a company doesn`t have a spectrum in one area doesn`t mean it should prevent it from lending it to another player and winning customers. This is particularly relevant for companies that have licenses to operate in an area but have only 2G spectrum but do not have 3G spectrum. We understand the need to prevent spectrum storage, but this should be dealt with with introductory obligations. – licensees should not have other licenses for services covered by Unified licenses. If the underwriters obtain another licence by purchase or merger, they should merge these licences into uniform licenses. – FDI investments: licensees should ensure that foreign capital in the company does not exceed 74% of the shares during the entire licence period. Up to 49% are authorized by automatic routes and up to 74% by prior authorization from the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB). It is interesting to note, however, that last month, the Indian government approved 100% of DL in telecommunications.

– Cross Ownership Prohibited: No licensee or promoter may participate directly or indirectly in another licensee with a range of entries in the same service area. The exemption granted in the previous Unified Access Service licensing system expires at the expiry of the service license and licensees should meet this requirement within one year of the migration to the single licence. This essentially means that cross-ownership between telecommunications companies is now prohibited, which could affect companies such as Vodafone, which owns 4.4% of Airtel and Reliance Communications, which may have to close their GSM Reliance Telecom arm. – Broadcasting: Licensees should not offer a radio or DTH service under this license and apply for a separate licence to offer the same. However, IPTV is allowed. 2001: a mobile phone licence offer for a fourth operator was launched in January 2001. The auction took place in three stages. The fourth licensee had to pay 17 per cent of the turnover in addition to the entrance fee. 1999: The new telecommunications policy of 1999 allows the migration of the takers of a fixed royalty scheme to an income arrangement scheme (w.e.f. 1/08/1999).

Under the new regime, royalties were levied as a proportional tax on the claimant`s revenues. Previously, there were two operators in each district and the 1999 policy allowed the government to be the third operator in the circle. [1]. Tata Cellular v. Union of India, 1994 CSC (6) 651. [2] Parades 9, National Telecom Policy, available in 1994 at bit.ly/N4dlEk.


Comments are closed.