Punjab-Haryana High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Jindal Steel And Power Ltd on 19 March, 2024
Author: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Bench: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039631-DB
2024:PHHC:039631-DB
[217] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
[1] ITA-442-2014
Date of Decision : 19.03.2024
Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar ...Appellant
versus
M/s Jindal Steel and Power Limited, Hisar ....Respondent
[2] ITA-48-2015
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar ... Appellant
versus
M/s Jindal Steel and Power Limited, Hisar .... Respondent
[3] ITA-49-2015
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar ... Appellant
versus
M/s Jindal Steel and Power Limited, Hisar .... Respondent
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present : Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel with
Ms. Manisha, Advocate for the appellant(s)-Income Tax
Department.
Mr. Salil Kapoor, Advocate for the respondent(s).
***
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (ORAL)
[1] In these three appeals, the questions of law as raised by the
appellant(s) stand finally decided by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in a
bunch of appeals filed by the revenue i.e. Civil Appeal No.13771 of 2015
titled as 'Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Jindal Steel & Power
Limited through its Managing Director', wherein, the contention raised
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039631-DB
2024:PHHC:039631-DB
ITA-442-2014 and connected cases -2-
by the revenue with regard to the two issues, firstly, relating to the
allowance of deduction under Section 80 IA of the Act and secondly, with
regard to the market value and assessment claimed by the assessee based
on such value, have both answered against the revenue and in favour of
the assessee. The relevant paras for the purpose are para Nos.10, 31, 33 &
34, which reproduced as under:-
"10. Aggrieved by the aforesaid finding rendered by the
Tribunal, revenue preferred appeal before the High Court of
Punjab and Haryana under Section 260A of the Act which
was registered as Income Tax Appeal No.53 of 2008. The
High Court in its order dated 02.09.2008 disposed of the
appeal by following its order dated 02.09.2008 passed in the
connected ITA No.544 of 2006 (Commissioner of Income
Tax, Hisar vs. M/s Jindal Steel and Power Ltd). That was an
appeal by the revenue on the same issue against the order
dated 31.03.2006 passed by the Tribunal in the case of the
assessee itself i.e. ITA No.3663/Del/2005 for the assessment
year 2000-2001. Insofar allowance of deduction under
Section 80 IA of the Act is concerned, the High Court
answered the question against the revenue as it was
submitted at the bar that the issue already stood covered by
the previous decision against the revenue.
31. That being the position, we hold that the Tribunal had
rightly computed the market value of electricity supplied by
the captive power plants of the assessee to its industrial units
after comparing it with the rate of power available in the
open market i.e., the price charged by the State Electricity
Board while supplying electricity to the industrial consumers.
Therefore, the High Court was fully justified in deciding the
appeal against the revenue.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039631-DB
2024:PHHC:039631-DB
ITA-442-2014 and connected cases -3-
33. Before parting with this issue, we may mention that
reliance placed by Mr. Rupesh Kumar, learned counsel for
the revenue on the definition of the expression "market
value" as defined in the explanation below sub-section (6) of
Section 80 A of the Act is totally misplaced inasmuch as sub-
section (6) was inserted in the statute with effect from
01.04.2009 whereas in the present case we are dealing with
the assessment year 2001-2002 when this provision was note
even borne.
34. That being the position, we have no hesitation in
answering this issue in favour of the assessee and against the
revenue. "
[2] The revenue of the present ITA(s) would also be governed in
the same terms as the final pronouncement by Hon'ble the Supreme Court
on the said issues vide its judgment dated 06.12.2023.
[3] Disposed of.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)
JUDGE
(SUDEEPTI SHARMA)
JUDGE
19.03.2024
'R. Sharma'
Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
