2012 (1) TMI 286

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....R. ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL : A.M The assessee has taken up three grounds in this appeal. Ground no. 1 contains a number of sub-grounds. However, the sum and substance of these grounds is contained in ground no. 1(a) that the ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer who had disallowed a sum of Rs. 26,14,06,249/-, representing assessee's claim towards expenditu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt years 1995-96 to 1999-00, for which a consolidated order was passed on 30.06.2008. In this order, it is mentioned that the question of differential rate, that is the difference between the rate stipulated in the agreement and charged by UPSEB in the bills and the rate recommended by independent authority was in dispute and the said dispute was not resolved during the relevant year. Therefore, t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) and Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT, 227 ITR 172 (SC). It is further argued that in view of the decision of Special Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd., 88 ITD 273 (Bom.), the subsequent bench of the Tribunal could not have differed from the decision of the earlier bench and a proper course of action would have been to place the matter before the President....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... time. In the first decision, the Tribunal took note of the stipulation in the agreement that power purchase rate was to be studied and revised by an independent authority, therefore, Nair Committee was appointed on 31.08.1994. This Committee determined the rate at Rs. 1.35 per unit. However, the report was submitted by the Committee much after the close of the previous year. It is clear from this....