TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasons hold that AO was not justified in disallowing the expenditure by invoking the provisions u/s 43B. We therefore, setaside the order of CIT(A) and thus the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - wheeling/transmission charges - Addition deleted by CIT(A) - HELD THAT:- We find that CIT(A) after relying on the various decisions, that were cited by it before CIT(A) and which has been referred to by CIT(A) in his order, has given a finding that provisions of TDS are not applicable to wheeling/transmission charges and therefore, no disallowance can be made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Before us no fallacy in the findings of CIT(A) has been pointed out by the Revenue. In such a situation we find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) and thus the ground of Revenue are dismissed. - ITA No. 7146/Del/2017 ITA No. 7308/Del/2017 - - - Dated:- 2-11-2020 - SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee by : Shri Vinod Goel, Adv. Revenue by : Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT- D.R. ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: The cross appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are directed aga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mstances of the case, the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A), Meerut may be set aside and that of the AO be restored. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add, modify and/or delete any ground(s) of appeal. 5. We first proceed to decide the quantum appeal in Appeal No 7146/Del/2017 for A.Y. 2014-15. 6. During the course of assessment proceedings, AO on perusing the details of current liabilities noticed that assessee had shown ₹ 590.10 lakhs (rounded off) under the head electricity duty and other levies payable to Government. On the basis of the details furnished by assessee, AO noticed that assessee had made assessment of electricity duty of ₹ 5,52,98,00,000/- of which ₹ 3,44,22,00,000/- was adjusted from the subsidy and the balance amount of ₹ 2,08,76,00,000/- was not paid by the assessee before filing the return of income. Assessee was asked to justify as to why the amount unpaid not be disallowed u/s 43B of the Act to which the assessee inter alia submitted that electricity duty is tax on electricity consumption imposed on the consumer based upon their consumption. It was further submitted that assessee collects the duty from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lable on record. We find that the section 4 and 5 of the Electricity Duly Act 1963 reads as under: (4) Every consumer belonging to any of the classes specified in column (2) of the Schedule shall pay every month to the Government in the prescribed manner a duty calculated at the rate specified against that class in column(3) thereof: Provided that in cases where the supply of energy to a consumer is regulated by an agreement entered into between the Government or the licensee and the consumer it shall be competent hr the government either to reduce the rate at which duty is leviable on such consumer or to exempt such consumer from payment of duty under this section subject to, such terms and conditions as maybe imposed by the Government. (5) Every licensee shall collect and pay to the Government at the time and in the manner prescribed, the Electricity Duty payable u/s.4 of this Act on the units of energy consumed by every c supplied by him the . duty so payable shall amount recoverable by the licensee in be a debt due by him. 16. Thus, as per section 4 of the such Act the duty is levied on the consumer of electricity specified in column 2 of the schedule and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the year under consideration and that of A.Y. 2015-16 has been pointed out by the Revenue but however Revenue has placed reliance on the decisions of Hon ble Gujarat High Court cited herein above. It is a settled legal position that the rule of consistency is required to be followed by the Income-tax authorities and that in the absence of any difference in the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration, the Assessing Officer is not justified in disallowing the claim. Further, Revenue has also not placed any material on record to demonstrate that the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal passed in the case of assessee for A.Y. 2015-16 has been stayed/ set aside or overruled by higher judicial forum. In such a situation, following the rule of consistency and following the order of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case for A.Y. 2015-16 and for similar reasons hold that AO was not justified in disallowing the expenditure by invoking the provisions u/s 43B. We therefore, setaside the order of CIT(A) and thus the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. 11. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. 12. We now take up Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
