{"id":39365,"date":"2024-02-21T12:28:06","date_gmt":"2024-02-21T06:58:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/pcit-v-gujarat-flurochemicals-ltd-2023-295-taxman-200-guj-hc-3\/"},"modified":"2024-03-31T06:27:59","modified_gmt":"2024-03-31T00:57:59","slug":"pcit-v-gujarat-flurochemicals-ltd-2023-295-taxman-200-guj-hc-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/pcit-v-gujarat-flurochemicals-ltd-2023-295-taxman-200-guj-hc-3\/","title":{"rendered":"PCIT v. Gujarat Flurochemicals Ltd. (2023) 459 ITR 242 \/ 295 Taxman 200 (Guj.)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee had a CPP Unit generating electricity, which was supplying it to a general unit. Electricity generated was being supplied to other consumers also.CPP unit charged Rs. 5.40 ps. per unit from general unit. The\u00a0 Assessing Officer applying sub-section (8) of section 80IA restricted same to Rs. 5.32 ps. per unit and, thereby, restricted deductions claimed by assessee under section 80IA.\u00a0 This restriction was primarily on basis that rate of Rs. 5.40 ps. charged by Gujarat Electricity Board (GEB) was inclusive of 8 paise per unit of electricity duty.\u00a0 This component of electricity duty Assessing Officer discarded for purposes of ascertaining market value of electricity generated by CPP Unit and supplied to its general unit. Tribunal\u00a0 reversed orders passed by revenue authorities and held that market value of electricity supplied by CPP Unit to general unit would be same being charged by GEB from consumers and it ignored rate on which power generating company supplied its power to GEB. High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal. (AY. 2014-15)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Infrastructure  development-Market value of electricity supplied by CPP Unit to general unit would be same being charged by GEB from consumers and it ignored rate on which power generating company supplied its power to GEB.[S.80IA(8)] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-39365","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-aeV","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39365","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=39365"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39365\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":40949,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39365\/revisions\/40949"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=39365"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=39365"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=39365"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}