Associated Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT

218 ITR 195Supreme Court of India1996#4315 most cited

What is Associated Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Amounts appropriated from revenue to a contingency reserve account under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, and its Sixth Schedule, are not deductible in the computation of total income under the Income-tax Act. This is because such amounts are not considered income of the assessee but are diverted at source.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Associated Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT · 218 ITR 195 · SC · Electricity (Supply) Act · 1948 · Sixth Schedule · contingency reserve · diversion of income at source · deduction · business income

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 28Section 80-IASection 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(vii)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 33acsection 80hhesection 32asection 117section 210section 4asection 74section 73section 72section 115jasection 288section 80ia(4)

Judgments citing Associated Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT

The ACIT, Circle - 1, Rajahmundry vs. M/Sthe Aryapuram Co-Oprative Urban Bank Ltd., Rajahmundry

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes; and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 195/VIZ/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 43Section 43B

…rt also took note of the following decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, which were referred to by the Tribunal and also the counsel for the assessee. (a) Poona Electricity Supply Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (1965)(57 ITR 521) (b) Associated Power Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (1996) (218 ITR 195) We extract below the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard: “The Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.’s case (supra) in support of their view. In that case, the Electricity Act provided for creating a reserve for the customers, in case the profit is more than the re…

The Aryapuram Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd., Rajahmundry vs. The ACIT, Rajahmundry

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes; and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 173/VIZ/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 43Section 43B

…rt also took note of the following decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, which were referred to by the Tribunal and also the counsel for the assessee. (a) Poona Electricity Supply Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (1965)(57 ITR 521) (b) Associated Power Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (1996) (218 ITR 195) We extract below the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard: “The Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.’s case (supra) in support of their view. In that case, the Electricity Act provided for creating a reserve for the customers, in case the profit is more than the re…

Aryapuram Co=Op. Urbank Ltd., Rajahmundry vs. The ACIT, Rajahmundry

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes; and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 517/VIZ/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 43Section 43B

…rt also took note of the following decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, which were referred to by the Tribunal and also the counsel for the assessee. (a) Poona Electricity Supply Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (1965)(57 ITR 521) (b) Associated Power Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (1996) (218 ITR 195) We extract below the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard: “The Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.’s case (supra) in support of their view. In that case, the Electricity Act provided for creating a reserve for the customers, in case the profit is more than the re…

ITO 19(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Indian Corporate Loan Securitization Trust 2008 Series 14I, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 4343/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Goasinindian Corporate Loan Securitisation Income Tax Officer-9(3)(2) Trust- 2008 Series 14 Mumbai C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Vs. 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent Income Tax Officer-(23)1)(2) Indian Corporate Loan [Erstwhile Ito-19(3)(2)] Securitisation Trust- 2008 Series 14 Room No. 108, Matru Mandir Vs. C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Tardeo Road, Grant Road 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Mumbai 400007 Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur &For Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray

…erefore the cited decision is not applicable in the present case on hand. (v) CIT vs. Sunil J. Kinariwala 259 ITR 10 (SC) This decision turned on its peculiar facts and is not applicable to the case under consideration. (vi) Associated Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (218 ITR 195) (SC) In this case the Hon'ble Apex Court held that there was no diversion of income as the assessee is in control of the money and merely because restriction was put on use of the money could not make any difference. Since this case is factually different from that of the case on hand, it is not applicable. (vii) Vellore Electric Corpn. Ltd. vs.…

The Chief Accounts Officer, Mysore vs. ITO, Mysore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the three assessment years are allowed

ITA 188/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.K. Shankar Prasad, JCIT(DR)
Section 133ASection 194ASection 196Section 201

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.188 to 190/Bang/2013 (Assessment years: 2007-08 to 2009-10) The Chief Accounts Officer, Mysore City Corporation, Mysore. … Appellant PAN: BLRCO2977C Vs. Income-tax Officer (TDS), Mysore. … Respondent Appellant by: Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate. Respondent by: Dr.K. Shankar Prasad, JCIT(DR). Date of hearing : 11/03/2015 Date of pronouncement: 31/03/2015 O R D E R Per Smt. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JM: These are assessee’s appeals against the common order dated…

Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 371 / 2012HC Delhi13 Feb 2015
Section 260ASection 32

…diverted at source. Diversion of income at source implies that income or the amount mentioned therein belongs to a third party and was not income of the assessed. Similar question arose before the Supreme Court in Associated Power Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (1996) 218 ITR 195. In that case, the assessed was a company engaged in the business of generation of electricity and distribution thereof to consumers. The companies were governed by the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. By reason of the provisions of the said Act and the VI Schedule thereto, the assessed appropriated certain sums out of its revenue to the c…

Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/371/2012HC Delhi13 Feb 2015
Section 260ASection 32

…diverted at source. Diversion of income at source implies that income or the amount mentioned therein belongs to a third party and was not income of the assessed. Similar question arose before the Supreme Court in Associated Power Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (1996) 218 ITR 195. In that case, the assessed was a company engaged in the business of generation of electricity and distribution thereof to consumers. The companies were governed by the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. By reason of the provisions of the said Act and the VI Schedule thereto, the assessed appropriated certain sums out of its revenue to the c…