AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
19 paragraphs · 393 wordsPetition is admitted for hearing. No notice need be issued as Mr. Dhruv Tamta, Advocate has appeared today on behalf of Union of India on advance
notice.
Petitioner holds a UL(ISP) license since 1.2.2016. Such licencee like the petitioner were benefitted by the judgment of this Tribunal dated 18.10.2019
passed in TP No. 169 of 2014 and some other connected petitions. The same judgment was followed in the case of the petitioner also vide order dated
8.7.2020 in TP No. 21 of 2016. It appears that Union of India as a licensor decided to change its policy in respect of old licencees for which guidelines
were issued on 31.3.2021. As a result of such guidelines, the old licencees were made liable to pay license fee even on the Pure Internet
Services. But the Uniform playing filed created by the guidelines of 31.3.2021 could not be implemented in respect of old licensees in view of a
challenge to the new guidelines made through TP No. 28 of 2021 in which an interim order of stay had been passed by this Tribunal on 3.6.2021.
The petitioner is also now being effected on account the guidelines of 31.3.2021 in an indirect manner and may be benefitted if the TP no. 28 of
2021Â or some other TPs on similar lines are ultimately allowed by this Tribunal.
However, petitioner does not want and has not prayed for stay of demand for license fees presently being made by the respondent Union of India on
Pure Internet Services but it wants a protection that the payments being made on license fee on Pure Internet Services be treated as payments under
protest and Petitioner should not be debarred from claiming refund of license fees on Pure Internet Services alongwith interest in case TP Nos. 28 and
29 of 2021 pending before this Tribunal ultimately succeed.
Considering the limited relief being sought at this stage, it is clarified that payment of license fees by the petitioner on Pure Internet Services will be
treated as payments made under protest and Petitioner will be entitled to press for the ultimate relief of refund of such license fees and also for
interest on such license fees.
Respondent may file its reply within six weeks. Rejoinder, if any may be filed within four weeks thereafter.
Post the matter under the head ""for directions"" on 29.9.2021.