TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1185
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act without appreciating the fact that owing to losses, there is no claim of deduction u/s. 80IA in return of income, and no addition whatsoever was warranted to the total income. 3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO is not justified in making addition of downward adjustment of Rs. 154,38,00,527/- to the final assessable income instead of re-computing the deduction u/s. 80IA(8) afresh, without appreciating the fact the appellant did not claim any deduction u/s. 80IA in the return of income. 4. That the DRP-1 and the AO / TPO has erred on facts and law by rejecting the internal comparable uncontrolled price (CUP) method adopted for transfer of power from the power unit to the cement unit, and making an adjustment of INR Rs. 114,14,28,568/-. 4a. By erroneously recalculating and re-computing the market value at a rate which is contrary to the provisions of section 80IA(8) and mandates of judicial authorities. 4b. By rejecting the comparable market rate for procurement of power from Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited (PGVCL) and determining the Arm's Length Price at Rs. 2.97/- per unit, being the median of the various sale ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the provisions of section 92E of the Act. Thereafter, the case was referred to the Transfer Pricing Officer ("TPO") on 25/10/2019 for determining the Arm's Length Price ("ALP") after obtaining the necessary approvals from the Ld. Pr. CIT-3, Hyderabad, dated 18/10/2019. Accordingly, notice u/s. 92CA(2) of the Act was issued on 26/11/2019 and subsequent notice / questionnaire was also issued on 29/12/2020. In response, the assessee filed its submissions on 23/10/2020 and 12/12/2020. Thereafter, on 11/01/2021 a detailed show-cause notice was issued to the assessee u/s. 92C(3) of the Act. In reply, the assessee furnished the details as called for vide its letter dated 25/01/2021. On a perusal of the submissions of the assessee and after going through the material available before him, the learned TPO determined the adjustment to be made to the income of the assessee on account of the Specified Domestic Transactions entered into by the assessee at Rs. 154,38,00,527/-. Thus, the Ld. TPO passed the order U/s 92CA(3) of the Act, dated 30/01/2021. Accordingly, giving effect to the Ld. TPO's order, the Ld. AO passed the Draft Order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144C of the Act, dated 10/04/2021 and dete....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....visions of specified domestic transactions are applicable to any undertaking or unit or enterprise or eligible business of the assessee (as referred to in section 80A(6), 80IA(8) or section 10AA). The word used is "eligible business". Therefore, irrespective of the fact whether the assessee claims deduction U/s 80IA or not for the year under consideration, the provisions of section 92BA are applicable as the transactions mentioned in the Form 3CEB pertain to eligible business of the assessee. Therefore, the objection of the assessee is not valid. 6.5.3. Taxpayer's objections The net effect of any adjustments made under SDT is NIL, result in tax neutrality as there is no tax arbitrage. The assessee argued that the transactions are entered between two units belonging to the same assessee. Both the units are two arms of the same tax entity and hence the substitution of ALP value (market value) in respect of inter-unit transactions u/s. 92 of the Act is a tax neutral exercise and it also needs to be highlighted that since the company has not claimed any deduction u/s. 80IA, it has no effect even otherwise, after application of the ALP, and the Transfer Pricin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... To be precise, if in the initial years of the tax holiday period, the assessee has disclosed loss under eligible business / unit, then by virtue of section 80IA(5), in the subsequent years when the assessee claims deduction on account of disclosure of profits under eligible business / unit, it is mandatory to adjust/reduce/set-off the losses of previous years of tax holiday period against such profits of eligible business / unit. Accordingly, in case, if the loss disclosed under eligible business / unit in respect of particular assessment year falling under the tax holiday period is enhanced on account of adjustment to specific domestic transactions u/s. 92BA r.w.s 80IA(8) in the subsequent years, before claiming deduction u/s. 80IA, the enhanced loss shall be set-off giving rise to reduction in the quantum of allowable deduction. In view of the above, it is imperative on the part of the TPO to carry out TP study with regard to specific domestic transactions notwithstanding the fact that the assessee has not claimed ay deduction u/s. 80IA due to disclosure of loss under eligible business/unit. Similarly, if the assessing officer makes any additions on account ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iew of the matter no addition whatsoever was warranted to the total income." 6. Further, the Ld. AR with respect to the finding of the Tribunal over the said Ground No.6, drawn our attention to paras 30, 31 and 33 of the decision of the Tribunal, which is the following effect: "30. "Having considered the rival submissions of both the parties, it is noted that, in view of our findings on merits, this issue has now become of academic interest; but for the sake of completeness of the matter, we proceed to decide this question as well. 31. For the AY 2016-17, the assessee had disclosed Gross Total Income of Rs. 20,68,23,313/- before setting-off of brought forward business losses. After setting off the losses brought forward from the earlier years, the Gross Total Income in terms of Section 80A of the Act was NIL. Accordingly, the assessee could not have claimed any deduction under Part-C of Chapter VI-A of the Act, because as per the provisions of Section 80A(2), the deduction permissible under Chapter VI-A cannot exceed the gross total income, which in the present case was NIL. Hence, when no deduction for Rs. 19,03,49,419/- has been claimed u/s 80-IA(4)(ii) of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...... non eligible units - "NEU")two legal entities having differential tax rates (or even a loss-making group entity). b. The provisions of section 92BA were introduced in order to determine the Arm's Length Price of specified domestic transactions, consequent to the suggestions given by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CL/ v. GlaxoSinithkline Asia (P.) Ltd. f 2010] 195 Taxman 35 (SC). d. This necessitated the introduction of Specified Domestic Transaction ("sun u/s 92BA in Finance Act 2012 by borrowing the transfer pricing regulations to establish arm's length nature of such inter-unit transactions with reference to provisions under Section 80IA(8) or 80IA(10)as applicable for 10AA exempted units or deductions under Chapter VI-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). e. Explanatory Memorandum to Finance Bill, 2012, reads as under: "The application and extension of scope of transfer pricing regulations to domestic transactions would provide objectivity in determination of income from domestic related party transactions and determination of reasonableness of expenditure between related domestic parties. It will create legally enforceab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed as eligible. Hence the re computation of profits of power unit is unwarranted. 1.6 Assessee not entitled to claim any deduction under Chapter VI-A. C. The Assessee submits that, owing to the losses in the current year and brought forward losses from earlier years, it is disqualified from claiming a deduction under Chapter VI-A, more so u/s 80(1A) at the initial eligibility stage itself as per provisions of Section 80A of the IT Act. ....................................... 1.8.1. Reporting of Transactions in 3CEB The TPO at para 6.5.2 justified the applicability of SDT provisions stating that the Assessee company itself has reflected the transactions of eligible unit in form 3CEB. The observations are as under ''The taxpayer reported the specified domestic transactions pertaining to transfer of power and transfer of fly ash in column no. 23 of Form 3CEB. Captive Power Unit of the assessee is an eligible unit for the purpose of Sec. 80IA. Further, as per Sec. 92BA, provisions of specified domestic transactions are applicable to any undertaking or unit or enterprise or eligible business of the assessee (as referred to in Sec. 80A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2[(vb) any business transacted between the assessee and other person as referred to in sub-section (4) of section 115BAE;] (vi) any other transaction as may be prescribed, and where the aggregate of such transactions entered into by the assessee in the previous year exceeds a sum of twenty crore rupees." 10. Section 92BA of the Act refers to the Specified Domestic Transaction which is also referred to in section 80IA of the Act. It was submitted that section 92BA only provides the determination of ALP in respect of specified domestic transactions and the specified domestic transaction has been defined and provided u/s. 80IA of the Act. Therefore, it was submitted that even if the assessee has not claimed the deduction u/s. 80IA, then also, the provisions of section 92BA can be invoked and the Revenue was within its right in determining the ALP of the energy received as per Rule 10B of income Tx rules. The Ld. DR had also filed the following written submissions in respect of the Revenue's contention that the provisions of section 92BA can be invoked irrespective of the fact that the assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 80IA or not. "a) The assessee's argument....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see that deduction is necessary in the year fails, as the deduction can be affected in any other year, by this year's transactions. (c) The assessee's contention is that the above argument of the AO is incorrect because it has never claimed the deduction u/s 80IA. However, that is the position now. At the time of the TP assessment, it is not known what will be the future stand. Thinking in the future, there will no effect as to the deduction, does not preclude the right of the income tax officer to scrutinise the transactions. 2) Is the rate applied to third parties by the captive power unit the correct ALP and correct interpretation of CUP? Rule 10B(1)(a)(i) reads thus: (a) comparable uncontrolled price method, by which,- (i) the price charged or paid for property transferred or services provided in a comparable uncontrolled transaction, or a number of such transactions, is identified; Emphasis is on comparable uncontrolled transactions or a number of transactions - hence median price for other parties charged by power unit is CUP and the AO was right in applying the same. Para 6.5.7 of the TPO order ( page 9 of TPO ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee, it has shown at the price of Rs. 7.85/- per unit. It was submitted that by increasing the price of power purchase, the assessee sought to increase the profit of the captive power generation usage, but since the internal comparable was available, therefore, the Ld. TPO / DRP have exercised the internal CUP method as per Rule 10B of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and had determined the ALP and made the addition of Rs. 114,14,28,268/-. 12.1 It was submitted that the decisions given by the Tribunal referred to by the assessee do not apply to the facts of the assessee as the amendment has been brought in by the Act, whereby it is necessary for the Authorities to compute the ALP in accordance with law. Further, it was submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Jindal Steel and Power Limited reported in [2023] 157 taxmann.com 207 (SC), had not discussed the scope and applicability of determining the ALP post amendment in the Electricity Act, 2003. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under : "32. Revenue has relied upon the decision of the Calcutta High Court in ITC Ltd. (supra). In that case, the High Court rejected the first contention of the rev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1. The assessee, being a private limited company, is engaged in the business of manufacturing of clinker and ordinary Portland cement at Kutch, Gujarat and it sells the finished goods under the brand name of 'Sanghi Cement' in domestic as well as in foreign markets. 2. In order to serves its internal needs, it has set up a captive power plant and such unit is eligible for deduction under section 80-IA. Summary of adjustments: S.No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 1 Transfer of power by eligible unit to non eligible unit 114,14,28,568 2 Transfer of fly ash by EU to NEU 60,90,830 Allocation of expense _ 39,62,81,129 Total 1,54,38,00,57 As per the TP Study: 3. In the TP Study, it is mentioned that the power generation unit is an eligible unit under section 80IA, and transactions between the e!igible and non-eligible units are considered as specified domestic transactions. "I. Sale of power by eligible unit to non-eligible units: 4. During the year under consideration, eligible unit has received an amount of Rs. 184,74,66,856 from non-eligible unit for transfer of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le unit or related party, domestic transfer pricing provisions shall be applicable and arm's length price shall be computed for those transactions Further, reduction of price in the case of eligible unit should not result in corresponding adjustment in the case of non-eligible unit. Arguments of the assessee: Rate charged by Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited shall be considered as arm's length price (the assessee has procured power from Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited at Rs. 7,85/ unit). Arguments of the Revenue: As the price charged by the Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited contains various other charges which are not applicable to the captive power plant, such rate shall not be considered for the purpose of computation of ALP. Further, the assessee sold the power to various third parties Hence, such a price shall be considered as an internal comparable." 13. The Ld. AR, in rebuttal, had submitted that the assessee has not taken the notional value of Rs. 7.85/- per unit as mentioned in para 6.3 of the Ld. TPO's order. However, to the contrary, the assessee has only taken the actual value at which the electrici....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate any infrastructure facility or starts providing telecommunication service or develops an industrial park or develops a special economic zone referred to in clause (iii) of sub-section (4) or generates power or commences transmission or distribution of power or undertakes substantial renovation and modernisation of the existing transmission or distribution lines : Provided that where the assessee develops or operates and maintains or develops, operates and maintains any infrastructure facility referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of the Explanation to clause (i) of sub-section (4), the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect as if for the words "fifteen years", the words "twenty years" had been substituted. (2A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), the deduction in computing the total income of an undertaking providing telecommunication services, specified in clause (ii) of sub-section (4), shall be hundred per cent of the profits and gains of the eligible business for the first five assessment years commencing at any time during the periods as specified in sub-section (2) and thereafter, thirty per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pecified therein shall be deemed to have been complied with. (4) This section applies to- (i) any enterprise carrying on the business of (i) developing or (ii) operating and maintaining or (iii) developing, operating and maintaining any infrastructure facility which fulfils all the following conditions, namely:- (a) it is owned by a company registered in India or by a consortium of such companies or by an authority or a board or a corporation or any other body established or constituted under any Central or State Act; (b) it has entered into an agreement with the Central Government or a State Government or a local authority or any other statutory body for (i) developing or (ii) operating and maintaining or (iii) developing, operating and maintaining a new infrastructure facility; (c) it has started or starts operating and maintaining the infrastructure facility on or after the 1st day of April, 1995: Provided that where an infrastructure facility is transferred on or after the 1st day of April, 1999 by an enterprise which developed such infrastructure facility (hereafter referred to in this section as the trans....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the 1st day of April, 2001 and transfers the operation and maintenance of such industrial park or such special economic zone, as the case may be, to another undertaking (hereafter in this section referred to as the transferee undertaking), the deduction under sub-section (1) shall be allowed to such transferee undertaking for the remaining period in the ten consecutive assessment years as if the operation and maintenance were not so transferred to the transferee undertaking : Provided further that in the case of any undertaking which develops, develops and operates or maintains and operates an industrial park, the provisions of this clause shall have effect as if for the figures, letters and words "31st day of March, 2006", the figures, letters and words "31st day of March, 2011" had been substituted; (iv) an undertaking which,- (a) is set up in any part of India for the generation or generation and distribution of power if it begins to generate power at any time during the period beginning on the 1st day of April, 1993 and ending on the 31st day of March, 2017; (b) starts transmission or distribution by laying a network of new transmission or d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ofits and gains of such eligible business shall be computed as if the transfer, in either case, had been made at the market value of such goods or services as on that date : Provided that where, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, the computation of the profits and gains of the eligible business in the manner hereinbefore specified presents exceptional difficulties, the Assessing Officer may compute such profits and gains on such reasonable basis as he may deem fit. Explanation.-For the purposes of this sub-section, "market value", in relation to any goods or services, means- (i) the price that such goods or services would ordinarily fetch in the open market; or (ii) the arm's length price as defined in clause (ii) of section 92F, where the transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred to in section 92BA. (9) .......... (10) Where it appears to the Assessing Officer that, owing to the close connection between the assessee carrying on the eligible business to which this section applies and any other person, or for any other reason, the course of business between them is so arranged that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he undertaking or enterprise referred to in sub-section (1)." 16. From a plain reading of section 92BA of the Act, it is clear that what is required for invoking the provisions of section 92BA of the Act is that the assessee transactions should be covered in any of the clauses mentioned at Sl. No. ii to vi of 92BA, either with it any of its associates or with any person having a close connection with the assessee. If the assessee is having the specified domestic transaction with itself or its close associate as per section 92 BA, then the arm-length price in relation to the specified domestic transaction is required to be determined by following Most Appropriate Methods as mentioned in section 92C of the Income Tax Act. Section 80IA (8) read as under : (8) Where any goods or services held for the purposes of the eligible business are transferred to any other business carried on by the assessee, or where any goods or services held for the purposes of any other business carried on by the assessee are transferred to the eligible business and, in either case, the consideration, if any, for such transfer as recorded in the accounts of the eligible business does not correspon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was shifted by the assessee to its power-generating unit. In other words, the assessee, by purchasing the power at a higher rate, has increased its expenditure and thereby entered into reducing its income/profit. In our view, the relationship between the two is squarely covered by the provision of sections 80IA(8) and 80IA(10). Hence, the transaction is a qualified transaction within the meaning of section 92BA. 21. It is amply clear that for the invocation of section 92BA, there is no necessity for the assessee for opting the deduction u/s. 80IA during the AY under consideration. The option is with the assessee to claim the deduction u/s. 80IA for any 10 consecutive assessment years out of the 15 years, as per section 80IA(2) of the Act. Merely because the assessee has not exercised the option will not make the eligible transaction falling either in section 80IA(8) or section 80IA(10) become ineligible. The eligible business is defined in section 80IA(4) which is not dependent upon the exercise of option by the assessee. Furthermore, the decision relied upon by the assessee in the case of Star Paper Mills Limited vs. DCIT (supra) does not apply to the facts of the case as the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rat fluorochemicals Limited 2716000 1344000 Kwh 38,30,400 2.850 7 Piramal Glass Ltd 2716000 768000 Kwh 23,80,800 3.100 8 Piramal Glass Ltd 2716000 537600 Kwh 16,66,560 3.100 9 Piramal Glass Ltd 2716000 594900 Kwh 18,44,190 3.100 10 PTC India Ltd 2716000 707950 Kwh 21,30,929.50 3.010 11 PTC India Ltd 2716000 83000 Kwh 2,49,830 3.010 12 PTC India Ltd 2716000 768000 Kwh 22,34,880 2.940 13 Swiss Glasscoat Equipments Ltd 2716000 853200 Kwh 25,08,408 2.940 14 Swiss Glasscoat Equipments Ltd 2716000 28800 Kwh 84,672 2.940 Average Rate 2.97 24. Based on the above table, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee company sold power to independent third party at per unit rate of Rs. 2.97/- whereas the unit rate at which the power was sold for captive consumption (self consumption) was at Rs. 7.87/- per unit. The Ld. TPO had issued the show cause notice to the assessee and, after considering the reply of the assessee, had benchmarked the transaction by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... would ordinarily fetch in the open market; or (ii) the arm's length price as defined in clause (ii) of section 92F, where the transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred to in section 92BA. 27. A plain reading of the above explanation clearly indicates for determination of market value either on the basis of the price that such goods or services would ordinarily fetch in the open market or the ALP as defined under Section 92F(ii) of the Act where the transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred to in section 92BA. Prior to the insertion of this explanation, the definition of market value was not available in the Income Tax Act. In the absence of the definition of the market value, various High Courts and the Tribunals have considered the per unit price of the electricity as charged by the public utility as market value. In the present case, as mentioned hereinabove and also in the order of TPO that assessee itself has taken the CUP method as most appropriate method in terms of 92C read with 92F of the Income Tax Act and has benchmarked the transactions. Thus, it is not the case of the assessee t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Regulatory Commission as all three utilities are discharging different functions. The tariff charged by the generator of electricity cannot be compared with the tariff charged by the distributor. Further, the tariff charged by the State distributor cannot be compared with the Captive Power Generator like assessee before us. There is no comparison between the functions performed by the state utility with that of the assessee. To demonstrate the disparity in the functioning of the State Utility and determination of electricity tariff per unit by the State Electricity Regulatory Commission, it is necessary to mention the various provisions of the Electricity Act and Tarif Policy notified by the Central Government. Section 61 - Tarif Regulations: The Appropriate Commission shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, specify the terms and conditions for the determination of tariff, and in doing so, shall be guided by the following, namely:-- (a) the principles and methodologies specified by the Central Commission for determination of the tariff applicable to generating companies and transmission licensees; (b) the generation, transmission, distrib....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cified in respect of generation, transmission and distribution for determination of tariff. (3) The Appropriate Commission shall not, while determining the tariff under this Act, show undue preference to any consumer of electricity but may differentiate according to the consumer's load factor, power factor, voltage, total consumption of electricity during any specified period or the time at which the supply is required or the geographical position of any area, the nature of supply and the purpose for which the supply is required. (4) No tariff or part of any tariff may ordinarily be amended, more frequently than once in any financial year, except in respect of any changes expressly permitted under the terms of any fuel surcharge formula as may be specified. (5) The Commission may require a licensee or a generating company to comply with such procedures as may be specified for calculating the expected revenues from the tariff and charges which he or it is permitted to recover. (6) If any licensee or a generating company recovers a price or charge exceeding the tariff determined under this section, the excess amount shall be recoverable by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....use, the imperatives of the need of using ground water resources in a sustainable manner would also need to be kept in mind in addition to the average cost of supply. Tariff for agricultural use may be set at different levels for different parts of a state depending of the condition of the ground water table to prevent excessive depletion of ground water. Section 62 (3) of the Act provides that geographical position of any area could be one of the criteria for tariff differentiation. A higher level of subsidy could be considered to support poorer farmers of the region where adverse ground water table condition requires larger quantity of electricity for irrigation purposes subject to suitable restrictions to ensure maintenance of ground water levels and sustainable ground water usage. 4. Extent of subsidy for different categories of consumers can be decided by the State Government keeping in view various relevant aspects. But provision of free electricity is not desirable as it encourages wasteful consumption of electricity besides, in most cases, lowering of water table in turn creating avoidable problem of water shortage for irrigation and drinking water for later genera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ves should be given wide publicity. 4. The SERCs may also suitably regulate connection charges to be recovered by the distribution licensee to ensure that second distribution licensee does not resort to cherry picking by demanding unreasonable connection charges. The connection charges of the second licensee should not be more than those payable to the incumbent licensee." 8.5 Cross-subsidy surcharge and additional surcharge for open access - 8.5.1 National Electricity Policy lays down that the amount of cross-subsidy surcharge and the additional surcharge to be levied from consumers who are permitted open access should not be so onerous that it eliminates competition which is intended to be fostered in generation and supply of power directly to the consumers through open access. A consumer who is permitted open access will have to make payment to the generator, the transmission licensee whose transmission systems are used, distribution utility for the wheeling charges and, in addition, the 17 cross subsidy surcharge. The computation of cross subsidy surcharge, therefore, needs to be done in a manner that while it compensates the distribution licensee, it....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the domestic consumers who are using the electricity upto the threshold limit, cross subsidy to agriculture, industrial users and commercial users, who are using the electricity on high voltage. The tariff is further dependent upon the geographical position of any area, the nature of supply and the purpose for which the supply is required. The State Regulatory Commission are bound by the direction issued by the State Government for determining the tariff under section 108 of Electricity Act, 2003, which is to the following effect : "Directions by State Government. (1) In the discharge of its functions, the State Commission shall be guided by such directions in matters of policy involving public interest as the State Government may give to it in writing. (2) If any question arises as to whether any such direction relates to a matter of policy involving public interest, the decision of the State Government thereon shall be final." 34. From the reading of the provisions of the Electricity Act, National Electricity Policy and National Tariff Policy, it is clear that the tariff determined by the State Regulatory Commission is dependent upon various factors....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as charged by the State Electricity Board is required to be considered for benchmarking the power supply between the related parties, is not applicable to the facts of the present case, as the internal comparable in the form of the power supply to the 14 companies were available with the Ld. TPO and therefore, TPO had rightly applied the arithmetic mean of power supply by it to 14 consumers. 38. In support of its case, the assessee has relied upon the following decisions as mentioned hereinabove. i. DCIT Vs. M/s. Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. ii. ACIT Vs. M/s. Philips Carbon Black Ltd. iii. ACIT Vs. M/s. Tamilnadu Newsprint and Papers Ltd. iv. Shah Alloys Ltd Vs. DCIT. v. Godawari Power and Ispat Ltd Vs. DCIT. 39. The first judgment relied upon by the assessee is DCIT Vs. M/s. Balarampur Chini Mills Ltd in ITA No.1672/Kol/2019 dated 05.05.2021. In this case, the Tribunal has adopted the rate charged by power generating unit and benchmarked the transactions accordingly. However, while doing so, the Tribunal has relied upon the decisions of jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Electrosteel Casting Limited, Graphite India Ltd., ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....P method under Section 92C of the Act and therefore, also, this judgment is not applicable to the facts of the case. 42. Similarly, the fourth decision relied by the assessee is Shah Alloys Limited Vs. DCIT in ITA No.1417/Ahd/20190 dt.21.06.2023. This case is also not applicable on account of distinguished facts in the present case wherein the assessee itself had benchmarked the transactions by following the CUP method under Section 92C of the Act and therefore, also, this judgment is not applicable to the facts of the case 43. The last decision relied upon by the assessee is Godawari Power and Ispat Limited Vs. DCIT in ITA No.42/RPR/2022 dt.24.04.2023 for AY.2017-18. Interestingly, much water has been flown after A.Y.2017-18 by way of insertion of the Explanation to Section 80IA(8) of the Act whereby the decision of the market value has been provided by the assessee. In view of the above, none of the judgments relied upon by the assessee are applicable to the facts of the present case. Recently, the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jindal Power Steel (supra) has held in Para 32 reproduced hereinabove whereby it has been held that in the absence of definition of marke....