DCIT, RANGE-3, LUCKNOW vs. M/S. PRAYAGRAJ POWER GENERATION COMPANY LTD.,, NOIDA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the income from infirm power sale during the trial run is a capital receipt and thus deleted the addition. However, it directed the AO to recompute the book profit under Section 115JB by including the confirmed interest income.
What were the facts?
The assessee company received income from the sale of infirm power during the trial run of its power plant. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition for this amount and also for interest income. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition for infirm power sale but confirmed the addition for interest income.
What were the issues?
Whether income from sale of infirm power during trial run is a capital receipt, and how book profit should be computed under Section 115JB when certain income is confirmed.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘B’, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M.
(A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.393/Lkw/2020 has been filed by Revenue pertaining to assessment year 2016-17 against impugned appellate order dated 14/08/2020 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. Revenue has raised the following grounds:
“1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the addition of Assessment Year:2016-17 2
Rs.42,56,57,616/- on account of infirm power sale which has been produced during the course of trial run and trial run can be made only after the plant and machinery has been completely set up which means that the process of trial ru
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 115JB
- Azure Knowledge Corporation Private… vs The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2013/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Digjam Limited, Jamnagar vs The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 349/RJT/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Braithwaite & Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 1(1), KolkataITA 1076/KOL/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2021-2022
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 964/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur… vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 963/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026