https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465842 A pro-rata charge for high-tension and extra high-tension electricity supply was upheld as within regulatory authority because the governing framework permitted recovery of reasonably incurred infrastructure costs. Regulation 5 of Chapter V contemplated estimation of costs for new HT/EHT lines, new substations, and augmentation of existing substations, with the differential cost forming the basis for pro-rata recovery. The charge was treated as a uniform mechanism to recover infrastructure expenditure from actual users rather than spread it across all consumers, and the challenge on arbitrariness, lack of rational basis, and Article 14 violation was rejected. en-us Wed, 10 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 18:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465842 A pro-rata charge for high-tension and extra high-tension electricity supply was upheld as within regulatory authority because the governing framework permitted recovery of reasonably incurred infrastructure costs. Regulation 5 of Chapter V contemplated estimation of costs for new HT/EHT lines, new substations, and augmentation of existing substations, with the differential cost forming the basis for pro-rata recovery. The charge was treated as a uniform mechanism to recover infrastructure expenditure from actual users rather than spread it across all consumers, and the challenge on arbitrariness, lack of rational basis, and Article 14 violation was rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 10 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465842