Cellular Operators Association of India and Others Vs. Dept. of Telecommunication

Decided On : Feb-10-2011

Court : Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal TDSAT

LAW: Section 4, the Indian Telegraph Act, Rule 5, Section 35, Rule 5, Section 227, the Companies Act, the Companies Act, Section 16 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s, Maharashtra 842-1014/2008- AS 1V dated 06.11.2008 15, Punjab 842-772/2006-VAS 7.7.2006 21, the CandAG Act, the CandAG Act, Section 16 of the Act, Section 35, Rule 5, section 16, Section 11, the TRAI Act, the CAG Act and Rule 5 of TRAI Rules, the Companies Act, Rule 5, Article 12 of the Constitution of India, the Companies Act, the Income Tax Act, Section 142, the Income Tax Act, Section 142(2A, Section 136 of the Act, Section 136 of the Act, Section 196 of I.P.C., Section 195 of Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 136 of the Act, Section 142(2A, Section 142, Rule 5

ORG: S.B. Sinha The, the Petitioner No.1 Association, the Dept. of, M/s Cellular Operators Association of India and Ors, UAS, Tribunal, the TRAI Service Providers, Tribunal, Tribunal, CAG, Tribunal, the Central Government, the Central Government, the High Court, Special Leave Petition, the Supreme Court of India, The Delhi High Court, the Delhi High Court, the Delhi High Court, DOT, the Conditions of License, Auditors, Reliance, Government, the Maintenance of Books of Accounts, DO Audit, Vodafone, Bharti Airtel, COAI, DOT, DO, Government of India Gazette Notification, C and AG, Controller of Communications, The C and AG of, the Public Accounts Committee, CCA, inter alia been, DOT, DOT, Vodafone, DOT, Court, DOT, DOT, Vodafone, Airtel, Tribunal, DOT, CAG, DOT, 10.5.2010 Subject Audit of Telecom Service Providers, Date 1 Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kolkata 842-1013/2008-AS-1V, Madhya Pradesh, Mumbai, Orissa, Tamilnadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Unified Access Service, UAS, DDG, Department of Telecommunications, Uttar Pradesh (East, 04.2.2005, Kolkata Metro, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Unified Access Service, UAS, Cellular Mobile Telephone Service, UAS, CMTS, DDG, Department of Telecommunications, Reliance Telecom Ltd., M/s Vodafone, VEL, xxx “You, Department, under:- &, Petitioners, C and AG, Petitioners, the DoT Communication, Petitioners, Annexure-C. &, Conditions of Service, the Consolidated Fund of India, State, Union, a Legislative Assembly, Parliament, the Central Government, the Central Government, Authority, Conditions of Service, Authority, the Government of India, CAG, the Delhi High Court, Tribunal, BPL Mobile Cellular Ltd., State, Leceister Citi Counsel, the House of Lords, The Supreme Court of India, Special Auditor, CI, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Company Limited, Income-Tax, Tribunal, Chelsea Rent Tribunal, MacFarlane, Correctness, the Supreme Court, Firm Lucknow, Income Tax, Assessing, Income Tax Authority, Income Tax Authority, CAG, DOT, Anisminic Ltd., Foreign Compensation Commission, the Supreme Court of India, DOT, State of, DOT, DOT

FAC: Telecommunication, Clauses 22.3, Delhi 842-1012/2008-AS IV, Ashoka Road, Ashoka Road, Sections 193

DATE: 1885, 16.3.2010, 16.3.2010, 16.3.2010, 1997, 2010, an early date, 22.3, THREE years, 1956, the period of, three years, 2006-2007, 2002, the last week of January 2010, 8th February 2010, the 16th February 2010, 22.3, 27th November 2002, June 2010, the first week of March 2010, the financial years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 10.5.2010, 16.3.2010, 6.11.2008 2, 06.11.2008 5, 19.11.2008 8, Kashmir 20-208/2006-ESSAR, 842-1016/2008-AS-IV, 06.11.2008 11, 842-1018/2008-AS-IV, 06.11.2008 12, 05.12.2006 18, 842-1021/2008-AS-IV, 06.11.2008 19, 19.11.2008 20, 06.11.2008 21, 842-1024/2008-AS-IV, 19.11.2008 22, 20-218/2003-HUTCH/BS III, 23.3.2004, Licensor, three years, 2006-07, 15 days, 16th March, 2010, 20-201/2003-BHARATI/BS-III 11.2.2004 7, Licensor, 2006-07, 15 days, 20th May 2010, the week, 22 March, annual, 3 years, 2006-07, 1971, March, 2010, almost 8 months, March 16, 2010, 3 years commencing, 2006-07, days, 8 month, Licensor, the years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, three years, the financial year 2008-2009, 1971, 1997, 1971, 1997, 1885, 13 of 1885, 3 years, 1956, 1985, Page 1054, 1956, 1961, 1961, 1988, 54, 1974, 1486, 2008, 2008, 1860, 1973, 1978, 1969, 1979, 2008, the financial year 2008-009, Rs.50,000/-

PRODUCT: no.1, no.1, 842-553/2005, Madhya Pradesh, 842-552/2005, Metro, Auditor, Rajesh Kumar, 14 SCC 151, Rajesh Kumar, Rajesh Kumar's

TIME: 16.3.2010 and 10.5.2010

CARDINAL: 19.5.2010, 22.6, 22.4, 22.5, 22.6, 22.6, 1956.&rdquo, 3, 5, 23.2.2010, five, 1, about 200 million, 22.4, one, three, 22.5, 842, 20.10.2008, 6, 20.10.2008, 9, 10, 20.10.2008, 13, 19.12.2007, 14, 842, 20.10.2008, 16, 17, 13.2.2004, 23, 20, 22.3, 2, 20, 3, 5, 6, 8, 22.2.2005, 9, 842-547/2005, 10, 11, 12, 16.3.2005, 13, 842, 14, 15, 842, 16.3.2005, 16, 4.2.2005, 17, 16.3.2005, 18, 19, 20, 22, 1.1.1996, 22.3, 23.3, 2, 20, two, 11, 16.03.2010, 16.03.2010, 22.5, 22.6, 22.5, 27.11.2002, 1, 3, 56, 1, 11, 1, 1, 22.4, 22.5, 22.5, one, three, 22.5, 22.6, 22.5, 2, 2, 181, 171, 2A, 53, 1, 55, 14, three, three, 29, 228, 2, 621, 3, 2A, 1, 2, 6, 22.5

GPE: Delhi, India, New Delhi, India, India, India, India, Jammu, Kerala, New Delhi-110117, Mumbai, Delhi, New Delhi-110117, Govt, Ground, India, India, India, India, India, Gujarat

PERSON: LICENSEE, LICENSEE, Licence, LICENSEE, LICENSEE, LICENSEE, LICENSEE, LICENSEE, LICENSEE, DoT, Licencee, DoT, Sanchar Bhavan, Tamil Nadu, Chennai Metro, Sanchar Bhavan, 10.5.2010, DoT, DoT, DoT, DoT, DoT, DoT, DoT, DoT, DoT, DoT, DoT, Petitioner, DoT, DoT, DoT, DoT, S.K. Mehta, Recourse, Anr, Dept of Telecommunication, Willer, K.J. Shetty, Anr, R. v. Kensington, Bench, Bench, Maneka Gandhi, Anr, Counsel, judicita, Andhra Pradesh, LVA Dixitulu, Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel, judicita&rsquo

WORK_OF_ART: Special Auditors, Cash Book, Journals, Registers, Ledger

QUANTITY: 05.12.2006 4, 842-548/2005-VAS, 842-545/2005-VAS

LOC: North East, Jammu, Kashmir, North East, Licensor, Rajesh Kumar, Sahara India

ORDINAL: first

NORP: Rules