Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Court held that in order passed by Commissioner, there was no mention as to under which category of Explanations (a) to (k) of section 115JB(2), these four items would fall . Tribunal, on appeal, had also observed that disputed four items were not part of list appearing in section 115JB and without identifying under which part of list disputed four items would fall, Commissioner could not have exercised revisionary powers . Order of the Tribunal is affirmed . (AY . 2009-10)
CIT, LTU v. Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (2021) 283 Taxman 549 (Bom.) (HC) CIT, LTU v. Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (2021) 283 Taxman 549 (Bom.) (HC).Editorial: SLP of Revenue dismissed , CIT v. LTU v. Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (2022) 287 Taxman 218/ 114 CCH 49 (SC)
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Book profit – Decommissioning levy, interest on decommissioning fund, interest on R & M fund and interest on R & D fund to profit as per profit and loss account – Revision was held to be not justified when in order passed by Commissioner, there was no mention as to under which category of Explanations (a) to (k) of section 115JB(2) these four items would fall- Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order was affirmed [ S. 115JB , 143(3) ]