9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also strictly not correct. From copy of the new domestic natural gas price 2014, dated 25.10.2014, it is seen that the cost of the price shall be determined in accordance with the formula given therein and it was also clarified that the cost of the price so determined under these guidelines was not to be applicable where prices have been fixed directly for a certain period of time, till the end of such period. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the claim of the assessee u/s 37(1) is allowable particularly since the assessee itself has offered the cessation of liability to tax in the year of crystallization. Therefore, the appeals of the assessee are allowed. - I.T.A. No. 1642/HYD/2018 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) - - - Dated:- 4-12-2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reopened by the AO, by issuing a notice u/s.148 of the Act, dt.30-03-2017. 2.2. The AO completed re-assessment, making addition of the aforesaid amount of ₹ 8,31,86,662/-, brushing aside the contention of the assessee that - the assessee is bound to pay the differential amount as per contract entered into with GAIL. 3. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) upholding the order of AO, dismissed the appeal of assessee, holding that - the impugned amount was a provision and hence not allowable as expenditure. 4. Aggrieved by the said order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us, by raising the following Grounds: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 8,31,86,662/- in the interest of justice . 5. Before us, at the outset, Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the present issue i.e., the differential price for gas supplied from Ravva Satellite field by GAIL, is squarely covered in favour of assessee, by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee s own case in ITA Nos.2092 to 2094/Hyd/2018, dt.19-11-2019 and argued that as per the said order of the Tribunal, the provision made for differential price to the credit of GAIL is an accrued liability and the same is allowable u/s.37(1) of the Act. 6. Per contra, Ld.DR for the Revenue relied heavily on the order of the CIT(A) and that of the AO as well. 7. We hear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee, Ravva Satelllite JV was likely to revise the price and that such revised price to $5.73 per MMBTU is applicable w.e.f. 1.12.2008. After such intimation, the assessee had agreed to pay at the finally agreed revised price and also received the fuel from Ravva Satellite JV thereafter. Therefore, there is an implicit obligation of the assessee to pay the revised price, subject to the maximum of $ 5.73 per MMBUT. Thus, the liability had accrued during the relevant A.Ys. The discussions between GAIL and Ravva JC on revision of price continued, but remained inconclusive till Feb.2017, when it was finalized that the GAIL shall charge the assessee at US $ 4.30 per MMBTU only, till 2014 and thereafter at $5.73 per MMBTU. Therefore, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
