TelecomLive April-2020

Bulk call records / Mobile phones Telecom LIVE April 2020 42 www.telecomlive.com TERM cells were not authorised to collect such data. In response, TERM cell sent a copy of the authorisation letter from the DoT which had also cited a letter of home ministry that was issued in 2019, but that was not for collect- ing bulk data. The MHA had allowed DoT and the TERM cell to collect data of particular numbers from which they receive com- plaints of malicious calls. In other words, the complainants allow TERM cell to verify the complaint using their own personal CDRs (call data records). But despite this, TERM cell complained to director general (telecom) to which the TERM cells report. In turn, instead of revisiting the direction, the DGT started calling up the telcos to provide information. When the issue was highlighted in the media, the DoT / TERM cell stopped reminding the telcos, but they have not yet withdrawn the letter. round the time when A the campaign for the Delhi Assembly elections was at its peak, in February the Telecom Enforcement Resource & Monitoring (TERM) cell of Delhi, an arm of DoT, issued letters to all the telecom operators to provide bulk call records on the ground that the quality of service (QoS) has to be confirmed using such a data. The TERM cells of other states also started issuing such letters for verifying QoS. Since this was an absurd requirement, the telcos did not provide the same and said that Bulk call records for QoS? Mobile phones DoT yet to withdraw direction to TERM cell GST hiked to 18 pc from 12 pc In 2018-19, all of the top four players - Xiaomi, Samsung, Vivo, and Oppo - reported poor perfor- mances. While, Xiaomi India's bottom line went into red for the first time, Samsung's net profit plunged 59 per cent. Oppo's net losses widened by 93 per cent, and Vivo continued in red. Confederation of All India Trad- ers (CAIT) has strongly opposed the move. Praveen Khandelwal, CAIT national secretary general, said, “the decision is highly unwarranted, deplorable and will destabilise mobile trade in India, which is already facing a battle for survival from online platforms. Instead of providing relief, the mobile sector is burdened with an unnecessary hike.” "We understand that one of the logic being put forward is that the industry is suffering from inverted GST! Instead of correcting this wrong by rationalising GST on parts, components and inputs of mobile phones, a bizarre move to increase GST on the final product is now being considered," ICEA (India Cellular & Elec- tronics Association) said in the letter to finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman. Manu Kumar Jain, Global VP & MD of Xiaomi India said that the rate hike will seri- ously harm the entire industry. "As a result of the GST rate increase, all smartphone makers will be forced to increase prices, which can weaken the demand and mobile industry's Make in India program." Mr Jain urged the government to bring back the rate to 12 per cent for smartphones under Rs 15,000, similar to differential GST structure for TVs smaller than 32 inch. t a time when all A major handset manu- facturers are strug- gling to cope with disruptions caused by the coronavirus (Covid-19), the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council has dealt a body blow to the mobile phone sector. On March 14, 2020, it proposed a hike in the GST rates on mobile phones and allied parts to 18 pc from 12 pc, which has come into effect on April 1, 2020. The hike could compound manu- facturers' problems as factory shutdowns and production cuts in China due to Covid-19 have led to a surge in the prices of several components. The increase in cus- toms duty on imported compo- nents announced in the Union Budget has also put severe pres- sure on their margins. The move has potential to dislodge plans for making India a digital economy as smartphones are set to get costlier. Most leading players are already operating under very thin margins.