https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753213 A reliability charge could not be imposed on a continuous process industry receiving uninterrupted supply through an express feeder, because the higher tariff already paid for that category was treated as compensation for assured supply and no statutory provision authorised an additional levy. Non-participation in the public hearing did not bar the consumer from statutory appeal, as a person directly affected by the tariff order remained a person aggrieved under Section 111 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The consumer was therefore entitled to challenge the levy, while the additional charge itself was held unsustainable. en-us Fri, 17 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 May 2024 08:30:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753213 A reliability charge could not be imposed on a continuous process industry receiving uninterrupted supply through an express feeder, because the higher tariff already paid for that category was treated as compensation for assured supply and no statutory provision authorised an additional levy. Non-participation in the public hearing did not bar the consumer from statutory appeal, as a person directly affected by the tariff order remained a person aggrieved under Section 111 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The consumer was therefore entitled to challenge the levy, while the additional charge itself was held unsustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 17 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753213