Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Tirupati V. Southern Power Distribution Company of AP Limited, Tirupati

ITA 808/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0641 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 10-09-2018
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 01-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALKA R JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: M CHANDRAMOULESWARA RAO
• Keywords: Capital asset; Depreciation; Capital receipt
• Section: 115JB; 12

Judgement Text

ITA NOS 807 AND 808 OF 2018 SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIB UTION COMPANY OF AP LTD TIRUPATI. PAGE 1 OF 6 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.807 & 808/HYD/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2013-14 & 2014-15) ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1) TIRUPATI 517501 VS M/S. SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P LTD, TIRUPATI PAN: AAHCS4056Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR REVENUE : SMT.ALKA R.JAIN, DR FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI M.CHANDRAMOULESWARA RAO O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. BOTH ARE REVENUES APPEALS FOR THE A.YS 2013-14 & 2014-15 RESPECTIVELY AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE CIT (A)- TIRUPATI, DATED 6.2.2018. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED TH E FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE CIT (A) ERRED IN DELETING THE NET ADDITION O F RS.2,19,41,76,453/-. 2. THE CIT (A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED FROM CONSUMERS OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN TREATED AS REVENUE RECEIPTS INCIDENTAL FOR CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY. 3. THE CIT (A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT CONTRIBUTIONS OF RS.258,13,84,063 RECEIVED FROM THE CONSUMERS ARE USED FOR ERECTION OF POLES, LINES ETC . AND SAID CONTRIBUTIONS PAID BY CONSUMERS ON DEMAND ARE DATE OF HEARING: 10. 0 9 . 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12.09.2018 ITA NOS 807 AND 808 OF 2018 SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIB UTION COMPANY OF AP LTD TIRUPATI. PAGE 2 OF 6 NEITHER IN THE NATURE OF VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS NO R REFUNDABLE. 4. THE CIT (A) ERRED IN IGNORING THE FACT THAT REVE NUES APPEAL ON IDENTICAL ISSUE IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FO R A.Y 2009-10 IS PENDING BEFORE THE HIGH COURT. 5. ANY OTHER GROUND THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME O F HEARING. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO THE DECISION OF THE ITAT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y 2009-10, WHEREI N AT PARAS 17 TO 18, THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED THE ISSUE AND HA S HELD AS UNDER: 17. AS REGARDS GROUND NO.2, THE CIT (A) HAS CONSIDE RED THE ASSESSEE'S CONTENTION AT LENGTH AND HAS HELD AS UNDER: '5. DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLANT WAS REPRESENTED BY SRI Y.BALAKRISHNA REDDY, CA., AND SRI B.RAVINDRA, CA., AS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES. THE. SUBMISSIONS AS MADE BY THEM A RE PLACED ON RECORD. I HAVE PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND ALL THE SUBMISSION S MADE, AS WELL AS THE REMAND REPORT DT.29.1.2013 RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESS ING OFFICER. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT IS DISPOSED OFF AS UNDER: 1) GROUNDS NO.1 & 2: THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL PERTAINS TO TREATMENT OF RS.58,53,98,096/- AS TAXABLE INCOME. THE FACTS RELEVANT TO THIS ISSUE ARE THAT, THE APPELLANT COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN DISTRIBUTION OF POWER TO SIX CIRCLES VIZ ., VIJAYAWADA, GUNTUR, ONGOLE, NELLORE, KADAPA AND CHITOOR. IT HAS NEARLY SIXTY FIVE LAKH CONSUMERS OF POWER. FOR EVERY NEW CONNECTION, THE APPELLANT COMP ANY IS COLLECTING CONTRIBUTIONS/CHARGES FROM CONSUMERS TOWARDS COST O F SERVICE LINE CHARGES AND DEVELOPMENT CHARGES. THE APPELLANT COMPANY HAS SUBM ITTED THAT 'ON RECEIPT OF CONTRIBUTIONS FROM CONSUMERS, THE COMPANY IS DEBITI NG TO CASH/BANK ACCOUNT AND CREDITING TO CONSUMER CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED AS THEY ARE CAPITAL RECEIPTS TOWARDS THE COST OF FIXED ASSETS'. THE APPELLANT HA S SUBMITTED THAT ITS ACCOUNTING POLICY, IS THAT THE ASSETS SO CREATED/CO NSTRUCTED, OUT OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM CONSUMERS, WILL BE DEPRECIATED A S PER RATES SPECIFIED UNDER GO NO.265 (FE) DT.27.3.1994. THE DEPRECIATION IS DE BITED TO P&L ACCOUNT EVERY YEAR AND THE SAME IS RECOGNIZED AS INCOME AND CREDITED TO P&L ACCOUNT, BY REDUCING IT FROM THE AMOUNT OF CAPITAL FUND RECE IVED, TO REDUCE THE DEPRECIATION CHARGED TO P&L ACCOUNT ON THE ASSETS P URCHASED OUT OF CONSUMER CONTRIBUTION. FOR EASY EXPLANATION THE APPELLANT HA S GIVEN THE DETAILS OF ENTRIES PASSED IN ITS BOOKS PERTAINING TO THE RECEIPTS FROM CONSUMERS. ITA NOS 807 AND 808 OF 2018 SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIB UTION COMPANY OF AP LTD TIRUPATI. PAGE 3 OF 6 THE APPELLANT HAS STATED THAT THE CONTRIBUTIONS REC EIVED FROM CONSUMERS ARE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS INCOME. FROM THE ACCOUNTING ENTRIES PASSED BY IT, THE APPELLANT HAS STATED THAT , 'IT CAN BE OBSERVED THAT THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS WHICH HAS PART FUNDED THE FIX ED ASSETS OF THE COMPANY, ARE ADJUSTED TO THE COST OF FIXED ASSETS AND ALSO THE D EPRECIATION ORIGINALLY CHARGED ON THE FIXED ASSETS ARE REVERSED, THEREBY T HE ASSETS ARE SHOWN AT NET VALUES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND THERE IS NO IMPA CT ON THE P&L ACCOUNT, AS THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS ARE NOT ON THE REVENUE AC COUNT AND THE DEPRECIATION ORIGINALLY CHARGED ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE COST OF ASSE TS PARTLY FUNDED BY THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS ARE REVERSED'. THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE ASST.YE AR 2009-10, THE COMPANY HAS RECEIVED CONSUMER CONTRIBUTIONS INCLUDING SUBSIDIES AND GRANTS TOWARDS COST OF CAPITAL ASSETS AMOUNTING TO RS.147.77 CR. AND AN AM OUNT OF RS.58.53 CR. HAS BEEN REDUCED FROM THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRA NSFERRED TO P&L ACCOUNT WHICH IS EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT OF DEPRECIATION CHARGE D ON THE ASSETS PURCHASED OUT OF CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS. THE APPELLANT HAS ALS O SUBMITTED THAT IT HAS FOLLOWED ACCOUNTING STANDARD-12 REGARDING TREATMENT OF CONSUMER CONTRIBUTIONS. ACCOUNTING STANDARD-12 IS AS UNDER: ACCOUNTING STANDARD-12 WHICH DEALS WITH CAPITAL BAS ED GRANTS SUGGESTS TWO METHODS FOR TREATING GRANTS RECEIVED FOR SPECIFIC A SSET? AS PER PARA-14 OF THE STANDARD, GRANTS RELATED TO SPECIFIC ASSETS CAN BE REDUCED FROM THE COST OF THE FIXED ASSETS OR THE GRANTS CAN BE TREATED AS DEFERR ED REVENUE GRANTS. PARA-14 IS REPRODUCED BELOW: 'GOVERNMENT GRANTS RELATED TO SPECIFIC FIXED ASSETS SHOULD BE PRESENTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET BY SHOWING THE GRANT AS A DEDUCTION F ROM THE GROSS VALUE OF THE ASSETS CONCERNED IN ARRIVING AT THEIR BOOK VALUE. W HERE THE GRANT RELATED TO A SPECIFIC FIXED ASSETS EQUALS THE WHOLE, OR VIRTUALL Y THE WHOLE, OF THE COST OF THE ASSET, THE ASSET SHOULD BE SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHE ET AT A NOMINAL VALUE. ALTERNATIVELY, GOVERNMENT GRANTS RELATED TO DEPRECI ABLE FIXED ASSETS MAY BE TREATED AS DEFERRED INCOME WHICH SHOULD BE RECOGNIZ ED IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS STATEMENT ON A SYSTEMATIC AND RATIONAL BASIS OVER T HE USEFUL LIFE OF THE ASSET, I.E., SUCH GRANTS SHOULD BE ALLOCATED TO INCOME OVER THE PERIOD AND IN THE PROPORTION IN WHICH DEPRECIATION ON THOSE ASSETS IS CHARGED. G RANTS RELATED TO NON- DEPRECIABLE ASSETS SHOULD BE CREDITED TO CAPITAL RE SERVE UNDER THIS METHOD. HOWEVER, IF A GRANT RELATED TO A NON-DEPRECIABLE AS SET REQUIRES THE FULFILMENT OF CERTAIN OBLIGATIONS, THE GRANT SHOULD BE CREDITED T O INCOME OVER THE SAME PERIOD OVER WHICH THE COST OF MEETING SUCH OBLIGATIONS IS CHARGED TO INCOME. THE DEFERRED INCOME BALANCE SHOULD BE SEPARATELY DISCLO SED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS'. THE APPELLANT HAS FURTHER REFERRED TO THE TREATMENT PRESCRIBED IN THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR SUCH CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS. AS PER SEC.43(1 ) 'ACTUAL COST' MEANS THE ACTUAL COST OF THE ASSET TO THE ASSESSEE, REDUCED B Y THAT PORTION OF THE COST, IF ANY, AS HAS BEEN MET DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY BY ANY OTHER PERSON OR AUTHORITY. EXPLANATION 10 STATES THAT, WHERE A PORTION OF THE COST OF AN ASSET ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN MET DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, B Y THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OR STATE GOVERNMENT, OR ANY AUTHORITY ESTABLISHED UNDE R ANY LAW, OR BY ANY OTHER PERSON, IN THE FORM OF A SUBSIDY OR GRANT OR REIMBU RSEMENT, THEN, SO MUCH OF THE COST AS IS RELATABLE TO SUCH SUBSIDY OR GRANT OR RE IMBURSEMENT SHALL NOT BE ITA NOS 807 AND 808 OF 2018 SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIB UTION COMPANY OF AP LTD TIRUPATI. PAGE 4 OF 6 INCLUDED IN THE ACTUAL COST OF THE ASSET TO THE ASS ESSEE. PROVIDED, THAT WHERE SUCH SUBSIDY OR GRANT OR REIMBURSEMENT IS OF SUCH NATURE THAT IT CANNOT BE DIRECTLY RELATABLE TO THE ASSET ACQUIRED, SO MUCH OF THE AMO UNT WHICH BEARS TO THE TOTAL SUBSIDY OR REIMBURSEMENT OR GRANT THE SAME PROPORTI ON AS SUCH ASSET BEARS TO ALL THE ASSETS IN RESPECT OF OR WITH REFERENCE TO WHICH THE SUBSIDY OR GRANT OR REIMBURSEMENT IS SO RECEIVED, SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE ACTUAL COST OF THE ASSET TO THE ASSESSEE. THE APPELLANT HAS GONE ON TO STATE THAT THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER HAS MISUNDERSTOOD THE ACCOUNTING POLICY AND ACCOUNTING ENTRIES PASSED IN THE BOOKS AND ERRONEOUSLY TREATED THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS RECEI VED FROM CONSUMERS AS INCOME. THEREFORE, THE AMOUNT OF RS.58,53,98,095/- ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS, IS NOT CORRECT. THE AP PELLANT HAS 'PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF JODHPUR VIDYUT VITRA N NIGAM VS CIT 321 ITR 18(2010). 2. GROUND NO.2 IS REGARDING THE TREATMENT OF SUBSID Y RECEIVED UNDER RAJIV GANDHI GRAMEEN VIDYUTIKARAN YOJANA (RGGVY) CREDITED TO P&L ACCOUNT AMOUNTING TO RS.2,36,64,224/-. THIS SUBSIDY HAS BEE N RECEIVED FROM THE GOVERNMENT TOWARDS CONSTRUCTION/PURCHASE OF FIXED A SSETS. THE APPELLANT HAS STATED THAT ON RECEIPT OF SUBSIDY FROM GOVERNMENT, THE AMOUNT IS SPENT FOR PROCUREMENT OF CAPITAL STOCK/MATERIAL AND PAYMENT OF SERVICE/LABOUR CHARGES FOR LAYING OF SERVICE LINES AND FIXING OF TRANSFORM ERS. THE APPELLANT HAS EXPLAINED THAT THE ACCOUNTING TREATMENT OF SUCH SUB SIDY IS SIMILAR TO THE ACCOUNTING TREATMENT FOLLOWED IN THE CASE OF CAPITA L CONTRIBUTIONS BY THE CONSUMERS. IN RESPECT OF THIS SUBSIDY, THE APPELLAN T HAS AGAIN REFERRED TO ACCOUNTING STANDARD- 12 AS WELL AS SEC.43(1) OF THE I.T.ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS REMAND REPORT DT.29.1. 2013 HAS STATED THAT THE ABOVE TWO AMOUNTS VIZ., CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS FROM CONSUMERS AND RGGVY SUBSIDY HAVE NOT BEEN FOUND IN THE DETAILS OF 'OTHE R INCOME: FURNISHED BY THE APPELLANT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FURTHER STATED THAT STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE REVEALS THAT THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.58,53,98,095/- AND RGGVY SUBSIDY OF RS .2,36,64,224/- WERE TREATED AS REVENUE RECEIPTS ARE NOT CORRECT. THE AS SESSING OFFICER STATED THAT THIS STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT IS CONTRADICTORY, A ND THE ADDITIONS MADE SHOULD BE SUSTAINED. THERE APPEARS TO BE AN ERROR IN THE INTERPRETATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT IS SEEN THAT THE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM CON SUMERS WERE REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE-SHEET AS CONTRIBUTIONS AND SUBSIDIES TOWARD S COST OF CAPITAL ASSETS, WHILE COST OF THE MATERIAL/CAPITAL COST INCURRED FO R GIVING CONNECTIONS TO CUSTOMERS WAS CAPITALIZED AND SHOWN AS ADDITIONS TO FIXED ASSETS. THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT WHILE COMPUTING DEPRECIATION IN THE BOOKS, THE APPELLANT CALCULATED DEPRECIATION ON GROSS VALUE OF ASSETS WH ICH INCLUDED ASSETS PURCHASED CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED FROM CUSTOMERS AS WELL AS SUBSIDY RECEIVED. SINCE, THE DEPRECATION DEBITED TO THE P&L ACCOUNT I NCLUDED DEPRECIATION ON THE VALUE OF ASSETS CREATED OUT OF CONSUMERS CONTRIBUTI ONS, AS WELL AS OUT OF SUBSIDY RECEIVED UNDER RGGVY, THE DEPRECIATION RELATING TO ASSETS CREDITED OUT SUCH CONTRIBUTION/SUBSIDY WAS CREDITED TO THE P&L ACCOUN T UNDER THE HEAD 'OTHER INCOME'. AS A RESULT, IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF TH E APPELLANT, GROSS DEPRECIATION WAS DEBITED AND DEPRECATION ON ASSETS CREATED OUT O F CONSUMER CONTRIBUTIONS ITA NOS 807 AND 808 OF 2018 SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIB UTION COMPANY OF AP LTD TIRUPATI. PAGE 5 OF 6 AND RGGVY SUBSIDY WAS CREDITED TO THE P&L ACCOUNT U NDER THE HEAD 'OTHER INCOMES'. IN THE NEXT STAGE THE APPELLANT WHILE COM PUTING ITS TAXABLE INCOME UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT HAS DELETED BOTH THE ITEMS FROM THE NET PROFIT AS PER THE BOOKS, BY ADDING GROSS DEPRECIATION AND REDUCIN G THE DEPRECIATION ATTRIBUTABLE TO CONSUMERS CONTRIBUTION/SUBSIDY. THE APPELLANT HAS THEN CLAIMED DEPRECIATION ALLOWABLE UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT ON THE NET VALUE OF ASSETS. THE NET VALUE OF ASSETS IS THE GROSS VALUE AS REDUCED B Y CONSUMERS CONTRIBUTIONS/SUBSIDY AS IS REQUIRED UNDER. EXPLANA TION-L0 TO SEC.43(1). IT IS LOGICAL THAT ADJUSTMENTS ARE MADE TO NET PROFIT FOR ENTRIES IN THE P&L ACCOUNT TOWARDS DEPRECIATION, BEFORE ALLOWING DEDUCTIONS TO WARDS DEPRECIATION AS PER THE I.T.ACT. IN THE NORMAL COURSE SUCH ADJUSTMENT I S REQUIRED ONLY FOR THE DEPRECIATION DEBITED TO THE P&L ACCOUNT. IN THE ASS ESSEE'S CASE THERE IS ALSO A CREDIT OF SUCH AMOUNT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ESAAR (ELE CTRICITY SUPPLY ANNUAL ACCOUNT RULES) EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT IN THE NATURE OF INCOME. IT LOGICALLY FOLLOWS THAT THIS AMOUNT IS TO BE REDUCED FROM NET PROFIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME. TO SUM UP THE AMOUNT O F RS.58,53,98,095/- AND RS.2,36,64,224/- WERE THE AMOUNTS OF DEPRECIATION C LAIMED ON ASSETS GENERATED OUT OF THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS/SUBSIDY AND HAD BE EN CREDITED TO THE P&L ACCOUNT SINCE THE P&L ACCOUNT HAD BEEN DEBITED BY G ROSS DEPRECIATION AND NOT DEPRECIATION AS PER ACTUAL COST. SUBSEQUENTLY, WHIL E COMPUTING THE INCOME, GROSS DEPRECIATION WAS ADDED BACK AND DEPRECIATION AS PER I.T.ACT WAS REDUCED. THIS DEPRECIATION AS PER I.T.ACT TOOK INTO ACCOUNT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.43(1) AND EXPALANTION-10 AND HENCE THE DEPRECIATION WAS P ROPORTIONATELY REDUCED AMOUNT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS. I N VIEW OF THE SAME THE DEPRECIATION ON CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS CREDITED TO T HE P&L ACCOUNT WAS ALSO REDUCED IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND, CORRECTLY SO. THE ACCOUNTING METHOD FOLLOWED BY THE APPELLANT IS NOT ONLY CORRECT BUT A LSO AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE I.T.ACT AND ACCOUNTING STANDARDS AND THE ADDITION M ADE IS DELETED. APPEAL ON GROUNDS NO.1 & 2 IS HENCE ALLOWED'. 18. WE FIND THAT THE CIT (A) HAS BROUGHT OUT THE AC TUAL ACCOUNTING TREATMENT GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND ITS IMPACT ON THE COMPUTA TION OF INCOME U/S 115JB OF THE ACT. THE LEARNED DR HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO REBUT THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT (A) AND DEMONSTRATE AS TO HOW THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT ( A) ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE SEE NO REASON TO INTERFERE WIT H THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) ON THIS ISSUE AND THE REVENUE'S GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2 IS ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. 3. THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AO WH ILE THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT (A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE ITAT IN THE ASSESS EES OWN CASE FOR THE EARLIER A.Y AGAINST WHICH THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NEED TO INTERFERE WIT H THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A). ITA NOS 807 AND 808 OF 2018 SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIB UTION COMPANY OF AP LTD TIRUPATI. PAGE 6 OF 6 4. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE FIND THAT THE VERY SAME ISSUE HAD ARISEN IN THE EARLIER A.Y A ND THE TRIBUNAL HAD CONSIDERED THE ISSUE AT LENGTH TO HOLD IN FAVOU R OF THE ASSESSEE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION TO WH ICH BOTH OF US ARE SIGNATORIES, THE REVENUES APPEALS ARE DISMISSE D. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2018. SD/- SD/- (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2018. VINODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1 ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), 3 RD FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KT ROAD, TIRUPATI 517501 2 M/S.SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. L TD, D.NO.19- 13/65/A, KESAVAYANAGUNTA, TIRUCHANOOR ROAD, TIRUPAT I 517503 3 CIT (A) - TIRUPATI 4 PR. CIT - TIRUPATI 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER