Accused Loses Right To Default Bail By Acquiescence If Extension Orders Are Challenged Only After Chargesheet Filing: Supreme Court AP High Court Orders Release Of Vehicle Seized For Mineral Transport Violations Upon Payment Of Penalty, Says Rules Don't Mandate Indefinite Detention Short Time Gap Between 'Last Seen' And Death Clinches Murder Conviction Against Fired Driver: Allahabad High Court Court Must Restore Possession To Dispossessed Party If Ex-Parte Decree Is Set Aside Even If Property Descriptions Differ: Andhra Pradesh High Court Management Cannot Deny Compassionate Appointment Citing Delay If It Failed To Maintain Service Records: Calcutta High Court Long Possession Alone Does Not Establish Tenancy; Burden Of Proof Lies On Person Claiming Status Of Tenant: Bombay High Court Consent Of Minor Immaterial: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction But Acquits Man Of Kidnapping Charges Notional Income Of Minor In Motor Accident Claims Must Be Based On Minimum Wages Of Skilled Workmen: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation To ₹56.8 Lakhs Revenue Records Serve Only Fiscal Purpose, Cannot Be Treated As Proof Of Title To Property: Supreme Court Executing Court Cannot Grant 'Deemed Extension' Of Time For Deposit In Specific Performance Decree: Supreme Court Specific Performance Decree Becomes Inexecutable If Balance Sale Consideration Not Deposited Within Stipulated Time: Supreme Court Supreme Court Protects MSMEs From Closure Over Missing Environmental Clearance If Pollution Boards Were Unaware Of Requirement Industrial Units Operating With Valid PCB Consents Can't Be Closed Merely For Technical Want Of Prior Environmental Clearance: Supreme Court Punishment On Charge Not Framed In Show Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Supreme Court Reduces Doctor's Penalty To Censure Plea Of Acquiescence Cannot Defeat Lawful Title Claim When Encroachment Is Established: Madras High Court Board Of Revenue Can't Quash Unchallenged Orders While Exercising Revisional Jurisdiction: Orissa High Court Penetration To Any Extent Sufficient For Offence Under POCSO Act; Intact Hymen No Bar For Conviction: Meghalaya High Court Expeditious Conclusion Of Summary Force Court Trial Not Arbitrary If Procedure Followed; ITBPF Act Self-Contained: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Doesn't Bar Appeal Filed Prior To Withdrawal Of Earlier Defective Appeal Against Same Order: Madhya Pradesh High Court Appointment Of Receiver Is An 'Extreme Remedy', Cannot Be Ordered Lightly Especially After Decades Of Inaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Market Value, Not Contracted Price, Determines Deduction -  Supreme Court Upholds Assessee's Right to Higher Deduction on Market Value of Electricity

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a latest judgment that clarifies several vital aspects of the Income Tax Act, the Supreme Court, comprising Justices B. V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, delivered a significant ruling on December 6, 2023, impacting businesses nationwide. The apex court unequivocally held that the market value of electricity, and not the contracted sale rate to State Electricity Boards, is the determinant factor for claiming higher tax deductions under Section 80 IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

In the detailed judgment, the court observed, "Market value, not contracted price, determines the quantum of deduction under Section 80 IA of the Income Tax Act." This observation sets a precedent for assessing the market value of electricity in relation to tax deductions, ensuring a fairer and more accurate assessment for companies involved in power generation and distribution.

The case, revolving around an appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax against M/S Jindal Steel & Power Limited and associated companies, brought to the forefront several issues related to tax deductions, depreciation on assets, and the classification of carbon credits. The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Tribunal and High Court's views paves the way for a more nuanced approach in computing tax liabilities for energy companies.

In addition to the primary issue of electricity valuation, the court also addressed the depreciation method on assets. The judgment upheld the assessee's right to choose the Written Down Value (WDV) method for depreciation, stating that there is no specific statutory mode required for exercising such an option. Justice Bhuyan emphasized, "The law does not mandate a specific mode of exercising the option for depreciation methods."

Furthermore, the apex court ruled in favor of the assessee regarding expenditure claims related to payments made to a consultant, affirming the Tribunal and High Court's decision. However, the issue of whether carbon credit is a capital or revenue receipt was left open for future adjudication, as it was not contested by the revenue at the High Court level.

Date of Decision: 6th December 2023

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX  VS M/S JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED

Latest Legal News