https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772049 The MP HC upheld the CIT(A) and ITAT's decision distinguishing between supply affording charges/electrification charges and energy charges. The court held that supply affording charges and electrification charges recovered from customers for laying extensive lines and acquiring plant/machinery are capital receipts, not revenue receipts, as they are one-time charges for facilitating electricity supply service rather than for electricity consumption. Energy charges recovered for actual electricity consumed at prevailing tariffs constitute revenue receipts. The court noted these receipts have different characteristics and relied on MP Electricity Regulation Commission regulations and Supreme Court precedent from Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. (1968). en-us Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 May 2025 11:19:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772049 The MP HC upheld the CIT(A) and ITAT's decision distinguishing between supply affording charges/electrification charges and energy charges. The court held that supply affording charges and electrification charges recovered from customers for laying extensive lines and acquiring plant/machinery are capital receipts, not revenue receipts, as they are one-time charges for facilitating electricity supply service rather than for electricity consumption. Energy charges recovered for actual electricity consumed at prevailing tariffs constitute revenue receipts. The court noted these receipts have different characteristics and relied on MP Electricity Regulation Commission regulations and Supreme Court precedent from Hoshiarpur Electric Supply Co. (1968). Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772049