Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Central Commission') in Petition No. 256 of 2009 wherein the
Central Commission has determined ... Central Electricity Regulatory Commission ( for short, the
'Central Commission') in Petition No. 260 of 2009 wherein the Central Commission
has determined the tariff
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission
(hereinafter called the Central Commission) in Petition
No.182/GT/2013 wherein the Central Commission has revised the
tariff applicable ... Central Commission, the
First Respondent.
3. In the Impugned Order dated 7.8.2014, the Central Commission has
disallowed the following items under additional capital expenditure
namely
Central
Commission, the Impugned Order of the Central
Commission and Judgment of this Tribunal, we do not find
any infirmity in disallowing the expenditure ... order of the Central
Commission in the Impugned Order affirmed.
22. Issue No. IV: Whether the Central Commission erred in
disallowance for calculation of maintenance
from 01.04.2009 to 31.3.2014.
2. By this Impugned Order, the Central Commission disallowed the claims of
the Appellant NTPC regarding additional capital expenditure ... Central Commission erred in not allowing the capital expenditure
incurred on installation of additional CT Pump. The Central Commission has
disallowed such expenditure
Issue No.6: Whether the State Commission is right in
disallowance of administrative and general expenses
for the FY 2008-09 (April to December ... Commission for deciding the RoE at the rate higher than the
rate specified by the Central Commission in its Regulations
for transmission. The Commission considered
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission
(hereinafter called the Central Commission) in Petition No. 332 of
2010, wherein the Central Commission has disallowed the interest
during construction ... Total Delay IEDC IDC
commissioning commission delay (in condoned disallowed disallowed
Appeal No. 129 of 2014 Page 16 of 44
SH
months) (Rs.in lacs
order of CIT(A). On this aspect, we confirm the
order of CIT(A).
43.1 The second deletion by the CIT ... CIT(A).
45. We have considered the rival submissions. It was the claim of the
assessee before the CIT(A) that this disallowance was made
under the head commission. During
assessment proceedings the assessee submitted details of commission paid
during the year bifurcating the same between commission paid to
intermediaries ... services rendered by the commission
11
agents to the assessee were also not clear. Thus, the commission expenses were
disallowed in the absence
provisions were applicable. When
the matter went before CIT(A), CIT(A) deleted the disallowance.
7. We heard the rival submissions and carefully considered ... Assessee went in appeal before the
CIT(A). CIT(A) deleted the disallowance.
9. We heard the rival submissions and carefully considered the same
alongwith
Rajasthan Patrika (P) Ltd. vs. Addl . CIT, Range-5, Jaipur
2. Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance ... Hero Honda Motors Ltd. Vs. JCIT 103 ITD 157 (Del.)
CIT Vs. Bhagwan Das ShobhaLal Jain 60 ITD 118 (Jabalpur)
CIT Vs. Varinder Agro Chemicals
