LAWS(APTE)-2013-8-1

POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED

Decided On August 01, 2013
POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Appellant
V/S
MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed by Power Grid Corporation of Indian Limited (PGCIL) seeking approval of transmission tariff in respect of (i) ICT III at 400/220 kV Pune Sub -station along with associated bays (hereinafter referred to as "Asset -1") and (ii) Combined Assets of ICT III at 400/220 kV Pune Sub -station along with associated bays and ICT III at Wardha Sub -station along with associated bays (hereinafter referred to as "Asset -2") under Western Region System Strengthening Scheme VI (hereinafter "the scheme") for tariff block 2009 -14 period in Western Region based on the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2009 Tariff Regulations").

(2.) ASSET -1 was put under commercial operation on 1.11.2011. The petitioner had initially claimed transmission tariff for Asset -1 from date of commercial operation i.e. 1.11.2011 to 29.2.2012 and thereafter, Asset -1 has been clubbed with Asset -2 on anticipated date of commercial operation i.e. 1.3.2012 and transmission tariff for combined assets has been claimed from notional/anticipated date of commercial operation i.e. 1.3.2012 to 31.3.2014, based on actual/estimated capital expenditure incurred up to dates of commercial operation and estimated additional capital expenditure to be incurred from date of commercial operation (actual/anticipated) to 31.3.2014. The petitioner vide affidavit dated 2.1.2012 has submitted that Asset -2 has been put under commercial operation on 1.1.2012. Subsequently, the petitioner, vide affidavit dated 10.5.2012 furnished separate management certificate along with tariff forms and details of IDC & IEDC for the period of delay. The petitioner also prayed to allow separate tariff to avoid the complexities. Accordingly, transmission tariff has been worked out separately for Asset -1 and Asset -2 instead of combined tariff as originally requested.

(3.) THE details submitted by the petitioner in support of its claim for interest on working capital are given hereunder: -