Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: hpgcl in Haryana Power Generation Corporation ... vs Haryana Electricity Regulatory ... on 31 July, 2009Matching Fragments
f) Sale price for Bulk Supply of power to be considered up to 4 decimal points instead of up to 2 decimal points allowed by the State Commission;
6. After review, the State Commission in its order dated 26.09.2007 accepting the plea of HPGCL regarding quantum of working capital but did not accept the other contentions of the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order of the State Commission, HPGCL filed appeal no. 43 of 2008 before this Tribunal. In the appeal proceedings, the appellant has prayed that appellant be allowed:
28. The State Commission in its order of 08.05.2007 has stated that 'interest rate is allowed @10% per annum in light of the fact that the prime lending rate of nationalised banks are hovering around 12% while HPGCL is able to raise short term resources at 200 basis points below the prime lending rate'. The State Commission in its order of 26.09.2007 observed that the rate of interest based on the documents submitted by HPGCL is in the range of 8.5% to 10.75% and that interest rate is not an area where HPGCL should be seeking cushion and accordingly rejected the claim of the appellant.
37. The State Commission in its order of 26.09.2007 at page 5 observed that interest on long-term loans is based on the calculation made after considering rate of interest, repayment and drawl for each individual loan and that it possible that a few loans based on floating rate may have undergone marginal change; however this may not affect the overall repayment liability. Thus, the Commission finds no merit in the review sought on this issue and rejects the same.
38. The State Commission in its submissions reiterated the above and further submitted that it had allowed Rs. 231.58 crore of interest on log-term loans against the original claim of Rs. 239.9 crore by HPGCL. The amount of Rs. 245.085 crore as interest sought by HPGCL is an altogether new proposal at review stage only that too without any documentary support as to interest rate on which particular loan/bond from the basket of its long-term borrowings have gone up or the lenders have revised it upwards.
52. The State Commission has submitted that issues raised by HPGCL on the issue of BBMB are before the Supreme Court and the same shall be considered as per the orders of the Apex Court and that further, for any rate difference, the appellant can take recourse to FSA mechanism.
53. We observe from the 08.05.02007 order of the State Commission that the State Commission had asked for details relating to depreciation amount from the State Government, which was not submitted to it despite reminders. In the absence of data, the State Commission disallowed the depreciation amount. As regards interest, the State Commission allowed interest to the extent reflected in the accounts of HPGCL for generation works. Resultantly, the State Commission determined the tariff at Rs. 0.12/kWh. The State Commission in its order of 26.09.2007 stated that the information sought earlier, as referred in the order of 08.05.2007, has since been received and is under consideration of the State commission and that decision on the same would be given in due course of time.