TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 821X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the CIT(A) is not justified. Order of CIT(A) is set aside and the addition confirmed thereon is deleted and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. - ITA No.135/NAG/2021 - - - Dated:- 16-12-2022 - Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Mahavir Atal For the Revenue : Shri G.J. Ninawe ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 01-09-2021 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre ( NFAC ), Delhi for assessment year 2018-19. 2. The only issue is to be decided is as to whether the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi justified in confirming the disallowance made by the AO u/s. 40A(3) on account of cash payment towards electricity bill pai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted on the cash payment made to Government authorities and the Rule 6DD(b) is applicable to the present case. He drew my attention to the case laws provided in the paper book in the case of Sumit Industries in ITA No. 12/JODH/2018 of ITAT Jodhpur Bench and in the case of Vinod Arora reported in 137 taxmann.com 450 of ITAT Amritsar Bench and argued that the finding therein rendered by the various Benches of the ITAT is applicable to the facts on hand. The ld. DR supported the order of CIT(A). 5. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. A similar issue based on same identical facts, this Tribunal decided the issue in favour of the assessee in the case of Aakash Petroleum in ITA No. 134/NAG/2021 for A.Y. 2018-19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Rule 6DD(b) of the Rules. 7. The profile of MSEDCL is at pages 21 and 22 of the paper book, on perusal of the same, it is noted that it is a wholly owned corporate entity under the Maharashtra Government incorporated in 2005 restructuring the erstwhile Maharashtra State Electricity Board to distribute electricity from the end point of transmission to the end consumers. Further, it is observed that the MSEDCL is a public company in the category of State Government Company with the main objectives of developing, operating and maintenance of distribution system for supplying electricity to the consumers in its area of supply. Further, we note that it is a deemed distribution licensee u/s. 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003 in order to ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash payments made by the assessee therein to MSRTC. The ld. AR argued that the MSEDCL is to be treated as State within the ambit of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and the order of Tribunal is applicable to the facts on hand. The ld. DR argued that the SNDL was assessed in the Central Division of Mumbai, cannot be considered as State . The ld. AR drew our attention to the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan State Electricity Board reported in 1967 AIR 1857, on careful reading of the said decision, we note that the Hon ble Supreme Court was pleased to explain the other authorities in Article 12, will, include all constitutional or statutory authorities on whom powers are conferred by law. Further, it is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt received by the contractor not in individual capacity but on behalf of the Government of Rajasthan and held no disallowance Rule 6DD(b) could have been made in view of Rules 6DD(b). 11. In the present case, MSEDCL which, is a wholly owned corporate entity of Maharashtra State, in turn, which is deemed licensee u/s. 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003, in turn, entered into an agreement with SNDL which is a subsidiary of Spanco with whom the MSEDCL entered into original agreement. The home page of SNDL shows that has been formed to look after power distribution to Nagpur city on behalf of the MSEDCL and the Spanco is answerable for its obligation towards MSEDCL, which clearly establishes that the SNDL performing its obligations in pursua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
