TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the transfer price of electricity supplied by the captive power plant to the assessee's manufacturing unit was to be benchmarked at the rate at which the State Electricity Board supplied electricity to industrial consumers for the purposes of section 80IA and the specified domestic transaction adjustment; (ii) Whether deduction under section 80IA was to be restricted to business income or allowed with reference to gross total income; (iii) Whether the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) required verification of TDS payment before the due date of filing the return; (iv) Whether the figures adopted in the computation sheet for book profit under section 115JB and income from other sources required correction.
Issue (i): Whether the transfer price of electricity supplied by the captive power plant to the assessee's manufacturing unit was to be benchmarked at the rate at which the State Electricity Board supplied electricity to industrial consumers for the purposes of section 80IA and the specified domestic transaction adjustment.
Analysis: The governing principle applied was that the market value of electricity for section 80IA purposes is the price that electricity would ordinarily fetch in the open market. The rate at which the State Electricity Board supplied electricity to industrial consumers was treated as the relevant market value, because the rate at which surplus electricity was compulsorily sold to the Board was a contracted tariff fixed under a statutory regime and did not represent a competitive open-market price. The Tribunal also noted that the earlier view relied on by the revenue had not survived in light of the later binding Supreme Court ruling and the subsequent rejection of the revenue's objections based on later insertion of section 80IA(6) and transfer pricing provisions.
Conclusion: The adjustment made by benchmarking the power transfer at the lower rate was set aside, and the Assessing Officer was directed to adopt the State Electricity Board's rate. This issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether deduction under section 80IA was to be restricted to business income or allowed with reference to gross total income.
Analysis: The controlling rule applied was that deduction under section 80IA is computed with reference to gross total income as finally assessed, not by confining the eligible deduction only to business income. Following the binding precedent, the Tribunal held that the assessee's claim could not be curtailed merely because the Department sought to isolate business income as the base.
Conclusion: The Assessing Officer was directed to allow the deduction with reference to gross total income. This issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Issue (iii): Whether the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) required verification of TDS payment before the due date of filing the return.
Analysis: The Tribunal found that the claim depended on a factual verification of whether tax had been deducted and deposited within the prescribed time. Since the material required examination at the assessment stage, the matter was restored for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal recognised that a fresh appellate claim is permissible if the statutory conditions are satisfied.
Conclusion: The issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for verification and fresh decision, with allowance directed if the condition regarding deposit of TDS before the due date is satisfied. This issue was decided in favour of the assessee for statistical purposes.
Issue (iv): Whether the figures adopted in the computation sheet for book profit under section 115JB and income from other sources required correction.
Analysis: The Tribunal found an apparent arithmetical or computation error in the figures reflected in the ITNS computation sheet when compared with the figures already accepted in the intimation under section 143(1). As the exact correct figures required examination and correction by the assessment authority, the matter was sent back.
Conclusion: The issues relating to book profit under section 115JB and income from other sources were restored to the Assessing Officer for correction and fresh computation. These issues were decided in favour of the assessee for statistical purposes.
Final Conclusion: The substantive reliefs on transfer pricing valuation and section 80IA computation were granted to the assessee, while the remaining issues were sent back for verification or correction, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeal with statistical disposal on the remanded grounds.
Ratio Decidendi: For section 80IA, the market value of electricity supplied by a captive power plant is to be determined by reference to the rate charged to industrial consumers in the open market, and deduction under the provision is computed on the basis of gross total income as finally assessed.
TaxTMI 
