- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd.
Summary of the Opinion: Anta Gas Power Station — Tariff Determination for 1.4.1997 to 31.3.2001
Factual and Procedural Background
The petitioner sought approval of tariff for Anta Gas Power Station (Anta GPS) for the period 1.4.1997 to 31.3.2001. Anta GPS had been declared under commercial operation effective 1.8.1990. The Central Government, Ministry of Power, approved a Revised Cost Estimate (RCE) for Anta GPS at Rs. 409.40 crores (excluding working capital margin) by letter dated 1.11.1994. The Ministry issued a tariff notification dated 30.4.1994 (subsequently amended on 16.1.1997, 30.11.1998 and 14.5.1999), and the 30.4.1994 notification was continued on an ad hoc basis beyond its nominal expiry of 31.3.1997 in view of Clause 6 of that notification.
Previously, the petitioner had filed Petition No. 82/2000 for revised fixed charges. That petition was disposed of by an order dated 2.1.2002 directing the petitioner to file a fresh petition for determination of tariff for 1.4.1997 to 31.3.2001 based on the Ministry of Power's notified terms and conditions (notification dated 30.4.1994). The present petition was filed pursuant to that direction and is disposed of by this order (Petition No. 36/2002).
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the petitioner's claims for additional capitalisation (new works and balance payments) for the years 1997–1998 to 2000–2001 should be allowed for tariff computation, and if so, in what amounts.
- Whether capitalisation of spares purchased after the date of commercial operation is eligible to be capitalised for tariff purposes (petitioner claimed capitalisation of spares for 2000–2001).
- Whether the petitioner’s claim for Foreign Exchange Rate Variation (FERV) for the period 1997–1998 to 2000–2001 is allowable, and the correct basis for computing FERV.
- The appropriate normative debt-equity ratio to apply for tariff computations.
- The applicable return on equity (ROE) rates for the tariff period and calculation of amounts payable by respondents.
- The appropriate method for calculating interest on loan (including annual repayment and average net loan) for 1997–1998 to 2000–2001.
- The correct depreciation rate to apply and amounts recoverable in each year.
- Appropriate O&M base and escalation methodology to compute O&M charges for the tariff period.
- The elements and method to compute working capital, the rate of interest on working capital, and interest on working capital for each year.
- Determination of the annual fixed charges for each year in the period and the basis for allocation and adjustment against amounts already recovered.
Arguments of the Parties
Petitioner's Submissions
- The petitioner filed this petition for approval of tariff for Anta GPS for 1.4.1997–31.3.2001 pursuant to the Commission's directions in the order disposing Petition No. 82/2000 dated 2.1.2002.
- The petitioner presented detailed claims for additional capitalisation (new works and balance payments) year-wise for 1997–1998 to 2000–2001 (aggregate figures provided in the petition and reproduced in the record).
- The petitioner claimed capitalisation of spares to the extent of Rs. 18.034 crores in 2000–2001, asserting that such capitalisation was in accordance with a revised accounting standard effective 1.4.1999.
- The petitioner claimed FERV amounts for each year (details provided for 1997–1998 through 2000–2001) and indicated the loans involved (IBJ-I and IBJ-II and their partial refinancing arrangements).
- The petitioner provided the historical audited figures (e.g., opening capital cost as at 1.4.1997 and opening O&M base for 1996–1997) and sought fixation of fixed charges accordingly.
The opinion contains no detailed account of adversarial respondent arguments in the pleadings; it records that respondents did not raise certain issues (for example, energy charges) during the pleadings.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The court proceeded year-by-year and item-by-item to determine what components of the petitioner’s claimed costs could be admitted for tariff purposes. The analysis and methodology applied (as stated in the opinion) are summarized below, strictly following the text:
Capital Cost and Additional Capitalisation
- The Ministry of Power’s RCE and earlier notifications established the starting point: project cost and opening gross block as on 31.3.1997. The opinion took as opening gross block Rs. 407.28 crores (i.e., Rs. 40728 lakhs) as on 31.3.1997 for tariff calculation.
- The petitioner’s detailed year-wise claims for additional capitalisation (split between works within scope of RCE and not within scope) were examined.
- The Commission adopted specific criteria (para 7) to allow or disallow claimed new works and balance payments:
- New works: (a) Works within scope of approved project cost but undertaken after commercial operation — allowed. (b) Replacement of existing equipment due to obsolescence or normal wear — allowed. (c) Additional equipment giving exclusive benefit to petitioner (no beneficiary benefit) — not allowed unless necessary for employee facilities at remote locations. (d) Mandatory expenditure arising from statutory obligation/change of law — allowed.
- Balance payments: (a) Pertaining to works/orders before commercial operation (presumed in scope of approved project cost) — allowed. (b) Pertaining to works/orders after commercial operation which were admitted earlier by Central Government — allowed. (c) Balance payments in subsequent years pertaining to new works already allowed by the Commission — allowed. (d) Other balance payments not in these categories — disallowed.
- Capitalisation of spares: The petitioner’s claim to capitalise spares acquired after commercial operation (not initial spares) was specifically considered. The court distinguished accounting treatment under revised accounting standards from tariff eligibility. It held that spares purchased after commercial operation should be treated as O&M expenditure for tariff computation (i.e., not capitalised) and therefore did not allow capitalisation of such spares for tariff purposes. The petitioner, however, was directed to maintain a separate account for yearly spares consumption so it could be reflected in actual O&M in respective years.
- Applying these criteria, the court produced year-wise allowed additional capitalisation figures (presented in the order) — including negative adjustments where balance payments or reversals applied — and produced closing capital cost figures for each year in the period.
FERV (Foreign Exchange Rate Variation)
- The petitioner claimed FERV for the years 1997–1998 to 2000–2001 on account of IBJ-I and IBJ-II loans (with partial refinancings noted). For the purpose of working out FERV and interest on loan, the court considered only repayments against the original IBJ-I and IBJ-II loans.
- FERV was allowed subject to restriction that the claim be limited to the amount capitalised and claimed in the petition. The court allowed the FERV amounts for the listed years as presented in the order (i.e., 531, 2618, 2957 and -1733 lakhs respectively for the four years shown).
Debt-Equity Ratio and Return on Equity (ROE)
- The court applied the normative debt-equity ratio of 50:50 as specified in the Ministry of Power’s notification dated 30.4.1994 (and followed in later Ministry action) for tariff computations.
- ROE was allowed at 12% per annum for the period 1.4.1997 to 31.10.1998, and at 16% per annum thereafter, following the Ministry of Power notifications. The court computed year-wise ROE amounts (full-year figures presented in the order), noting that pro-rata payments are to be made for part-year periods.
Interest on Loan
- The court used a formula for annual repayment applied pro rata to normative loan: Annual repayment during the year × normative loan at beginning of year / actual loan at beginning of year. The repayment amount used for interest calculation was the higher of the figure computed by that formula or the amount given in the petition.
- Using the above approach, the court calculated annual repayments and then derived net loan opening, net loan closing, average net loan, applicable interest rate for each year and interest on loan amounts for the period (figures reproduced in the order).
Depreciation
- The court took depreciation figures up to 31.3.1992 from accounts and depreciation recovered in tariff for 1.4.1992 to 31.3.1997 as notified by the Ministry. It applied depreciation at 7.92% (the rate allowed by the Ministry) for 1.4.1997 to 31.3.2001 and computed year-wise depreciation amounts to be recovered in tariff (full-year figures set out; pro-rata for part-years).
Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Expenses
- The court took the audited O&M expense for 1996–1997 (Rs. 1509 lakhs, including water charges) as base and applied an escalation factor of 10% per annum to compute O&M for 1997–1998 to 2000–2001. Based on this methodology, the O&M amounts for each year were produced. The court treated water charges as included in this base and did not consider them separately.
Working Capital and Interest on Working Capital
- Working capital components were defined and applied as follows (per the opinion):
- Fuel cost and Naptha stock: used the audited 1996–1997 balance sheet inventory schedule figure for fuel oil and the fuel cost as considered by Central Government in the 30.4.1994 notification (since variable charge was not being revised).
- O&M for working capital: one month’s O&M for the relevant year.
- Spares: actual spares value from audited 1996–1997 balance sheet used for working capital across the years.
- Receivables: two months of fixed and variable charges; for variable component, the previous tariff period’s variable charge was used because variable charges were not being revised for this order.
- The court followed the Ministry’s earlier working capital margin of Rs. 8.60 crores for calculations and used the average SBI PLR for each year as the rate for interest on working capital (14%, 13%, 12% and 11.5% for the respective years), producing year-wise interest on working capital amounts.
Calculation of Annual Fixed Charges and Allocation
- Using the determined components (interest on loan, interest on working capital, depreciation, ROE, and O&M), the court computed annual fixed charges for each year in the period (full-year amounts are set out in the order; pro-rata payments to be made for part-year periods).
- The court directed that fixed charges decided be shared by respondents in the ratio of energy drawn from Anta GPS during the relevant period.
- It was noted that the petitioner had already recovered fixed charges from respondents on an ad hoc basis under the 30.4.1994 notification continuing beyond 31.3.1997; amounts already recovered shall be adjusted against the fixed charges determined by this order.
- The petitioner did not provide energy (variable) charges for the years and stated recalculation would have no effect because operational norms remain unchanged; respondents did not raise issues on this point during pleadings.
Holding and Implications
Holding: The Commission approved the tariff components and fixed charges for Anta GPS for the period 1.4.1997 to 31.3.2001 in the amounts and manner set out in the order. The court specifically allowed (subject to the limitations and methodologies applied in the order) year-wise additional capitalisation and FERV as presented, adopted a 50:50 debt-equity ratio, allowed ROE at 12% until 31.10.1998 and 16% thereafter, applied depreciation at 7.92%, computed interest on loan and working capital as described, and fixed annual fixed charges for each year. The order disposes of Petition No. 36/2002.
Implications (direct effect):
- The respondents are to pay the fixed charges as determined by the Commission for each year of 1997–1998 through 2000–2001, with pro-rata adjustments for part-year periods where applicable.
- The fixed charges are to be shared among respondents in proportion to energy drawn from Anta GPS during the relevant periods.
- Amounts already recovered by the petitioner under the ad hoc continuation of the 30.4.1994 notification are to be adjusted against the fixed charges determined by this order.
- Capitalisation of spares acquired after commercial operation was disallowed for tariff purposes (these are to be treated as O&M), and the petitioner was required to maintain separate accounts for spares consumption to permit appropriate O&M accounting in the respective years.
- No broader precedent or novel legal principle is articulated in the opinion beyond applying the Ministry of Power’s notifications and established tariff computation methodologies; the decision operates as a determination of the petitioner’s tariff claim for the specified past period.
This summary is based exclusively on the information contained in the provided opinion. No external materials or precedents beyond the opinion text were relied upon.
The petitioner has filed this petition for approval of tariff in respect of Anta Gas Power Station (Anta GPS) for the period from 1.4.1997 to 31.3.2001
2. Anta GPS was declared under commercial operation with effect from 1.8.1990 The Central Government in Ministry of Power accorded its approval for the Revised Cost Estimate for Anta GPS at a cost of Rs. 409.40 crores, excluding Working Capital Margin of Rs. 8.57 crores vide its letter dated 1.11.1994 The tariff for Anta GPS was notified by Ministry of Power vide notification dated 30.4.1994, which was subsequently amended vide notifications dated 16.1.1997, 30.11.1998 and 14.5.1999 to account for increase in return on equity from 12% to 16% and additional capitalisation and FERV based on audited accounts up to 1996–1997. The notification dated 30.4.1994 was valid up to 31.3.1997, but was continued on ad hoc basis beyond 31.3.1997 in view of Clause 6 thereof.
3. The petitioner had filed Petition No. 82/2000 to claim revised fixed charges due to additional capital expenditure and FERV capitalised in respect of Anta GPS for the years 1997–1998 to 2000–2001. The said petition was disposed of vide order dated 2.1.2002, when the Commission directed the petitioner to file fresh petition for determination of tariff for the period from 1.4.1997 to 31.3.2001 based on the terms and conditions notified by Ministry of Power as per the notification dated 30.4.1994 The present petition has been filed in pursuance of these directions of the Commission contained in the order dated 2.1.2002
CAPITAL COST
4. Ministry of Power in its notification dated 16.1.1997 considered the project cost of Rs. 372.91 crores, which included gross block of Rs. 344.66 crores and initial spares of Rs. 28.25 crores. Ministry of Power had allowed additional capitalisation of Rs. 23.26 crores during 1992–1993 to 1996–1997 and FERV of Rs. 11.11 crores. Therefore, the total admitted cost of the project, including the initial spares works out to Rs. 407.28 crores as on 31.3.1997 and has been considered as the opening gross block for the purpose of present tariff petition.
5. The petitioner has claimed the amounts as detailed below for additional capitalisation during the period from 1997–1998 to 2000–2001:
(Rs. in lakhs)
Financial Years 1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 Total 1. New works (a) Within the scope of RCE 0.29 1.53 12.20 6.58 20.60 (b) Not in the scope of RCE 206.39 82.42 415.75 1669.35 2373.91 Total (a+b) 206.68 83.95 427.95 1675.93 2394.51 2. Balance Payments (-) 14.44 24.64 (-) 0.83 (-) 24.16 (-) 14.79 Total (1+2) 192.24 108.59 427.12 1651.77 2379.72
6. The petitioner has furnished justification for the following expenditure under the New Works in the respective years:
(Rs. in lakhs)
Financial Years 1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 Total New works (a) Within the scope of RCE 0.29 1.53 12.20 6.58 20.60 (b) Not in the scope of RCE 197.22 91.30 392.55 1694.97 2376.04 Total (a+b) 197.51 92.83 404.75 1701.55 2396.64
7. The following methodology has been adopted for allowing or disallowing the claim of the petitioner:
New Works:
(a) Any work within the scope of approved project cost, but undertaken after the date of commercial operation has been allowed.
(b) The expenditure incurred for the replacement of existing equipment/facility due to technology becoming obsolete or the equipment having outlived its utility in the normal course of operation, has been allowed for capitalisation.
(c) The expenditure on the works undertaken on purchase of additional equipment/facility which is giving benefit exclusively to the petitioner without any apparent benefit to the beneficiaries has not been allowed, unless it is found that expenditure was necessary for the benefit of the employees for giving necessary facilities at the remote location of the power project.
(d) Any mandatory expenditure arising out of statutory obligation due to change of law, etc., has been allowed.
Balance Payments:
(a) Pertaining to works undertaken or order placed before the date of commercial operation which are presumed to be within the scope of approved project cost have been allowed.
(b) Pertaining to works undertaken or order placed after the date of commercial operation which might have been admitted by the Central Government in the previous tariff period have been allowed.
(c) Pertaining to works undertaken or order placed after the date of commercial operation which has been claimed as new works in the relevant years in the tariff period under consideration and allowed by the Commission, the balance payments in subsequent years pertaining to these new works have also been allowed.
(d) Other balance payments not falling in above categories have been disallowed.
8. During the financial year 2000–2001, the petitioner has sought capitalisation of spares to the extent of Rs. 18.034 crores as new works. It has been clarified by the petitioner that the capitalisation of spares is in accordance with the revised accounting standard, which became mandatory with effect from 1.4.1999 As per the present practice, only initial spares up to a certain amount, say 5% of the project cost are allowed to be capitalised. We would like to point out that maintaining accounts as per accounting standard is one thing and treating any expenditure to be eligible for tariff computation is another. The expenditure on spares subsequent to the date of commercial operation is to be accounted for as a part of O&M expenses in so far as tariff computation is concerned. Therefore, we do not allow the capitalisation of spares purchased after the date of commercial operation for tariff purpose. However, the petitioner should maintain a separate account for the yearly consumption of spares so that the same could be accounted for in the actual O&M for the respective years for the purpose of tariff.
9. Based on above discussion and the criteria outlined in para 8 above, we allow the year-wise additional capitalisation as given below:
Financial Years 1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 Total 1. New works (a) Within the scope of RCE 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.58 6.58 (b) Not in the scope of RCE 23.88 12.16 220.88 (-) 166.11 90.81 Total (a+b) 23.88 12.16 220.88 (-) 159.53 97.39 2. Balance Payments (-) 28.59 24.64 (-) 0.83 (-) 26.69 (-) 31.47 Total (1+2) (-) 4.71 36.80 220.05 (-) 186.22 65.92
10. The petitioner's claim for additional capitalisation on account of FERV has also been considered. The petitioner has claimed FERV as per the details given below:
(Rs. in lakhs) 1997–1998 531 1998–1999 2618 1999–2000 2957 2000–2001 (-) 1733
11. FERV claimed is on account of IBJ-I and IBJ-II loan. IBJ-I loan was partly refinanced by SBI, Toyko loan and IBJ-II loan was partly re-financed by Sumi-tomo-I & III loan, SBI-NY-II and ING (PGCIL). However, for the purposes of working out the FERV and interest on loan, we have considered only the repayment against the original IBJ-I loan and IBJ-II loan. FERV for the years 1997–1998 to 2000–2001 has been worked out accordingly. However, the claim on account of FERV has been restricted to the amount capitalised and claimed in the petition.
Accordingly, we allow FERV as under:
(Rs. In lakhs)
Year 1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 FERV 531 2618 2957 (-) 1733
12. In view of the above, the capital cost allowed for the purpose of tariff is as under:
(Rs. in lakhs)
1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 (i) Opening Capital cost as on 1st April 40728 41255 43909 47087 (ii) Additions during the year due to (a) Additional capitalisation (-) 5 37 220 (-) 186 (b) FERV 531 2618 2957 (-) 1733 (iii) Closing Capital Cost as on 31st March of the year 41255 43909 47087 45167
DEBT-EQUITY RATIO
13. Ministry of Power in its notification dated 30.4.1994 had considered the normative debt-equity ratio of 50:50. This debt-equity ratio was followed by Ministry of Power in ts notification dated 14.5.1999 while allowing additional capitalisation up to 1996–1997. For the purpose of calculation of fixed charges in this petition, same debt-equity ratio has been adopted by us.
RETURN ON EQUITY (ROE)
14. ROE of 12% per annum for the period from 1.4.1997 to 31.10.1998 and thereafter, ROE @ 16% per annum has been allowed as provided in the notification issued by Ministry of Power. The charges payable by the respondents on account of return on equity works out as under:
(Rs. in lakhs)*
1997–1998 2460 1998–1999 (1.4.1998 to 31.10.1998) 2555 1998–1999 (1.11.1998 to 31.3.1999) 3407 1999–2000 3640 2000–2001 3690
* The amount relates to the whole year. For part of the year, pro-rata payments shall be made.
INTEREST ON LOAN
15. The Central Government while notifying tariff on 30.4.1994 as amended vide notification dated 16.1.1997, considered the total cost of Rs. 372.91 crores, including initial spares of Rs. 28.25 crores. This total cost had been divided into normative debt and equity in the ratio of 50:50.
16. The annual repayment amount from the year 1997–1998 to 2000–2001 has been worked out as follows:
= Annual repayment during the year × normative loan at the beginning of the year/Actual loan at the beginning of the year.
17. The amount of annual repayment for calculation of interest on loan is considered as worked out by the above formula, or as given in the petition, whichever is higher. Accordingly, the annual repayment considered for the calculation of interest on loan, is as follows:
(Rs. In lakhs)
Year 1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 Repayment 1200 1318 1398 1384
18. The charges payable by the respondents to the petitioner on account of interest on loan are computed hereinbelow:
(Rs. in lakhs)
Particulars 1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 From 1.4.98 to 31.10.98 From 1.11.98 31.3.99 Loan Gross loan-Opening 20364 20627 21955 23543 Cumulative repayments of Loans upto previous year 2944 4144 5462 6860 Net loan-Opening 17420 16483 16493 16683 Increase/Decrease due to FERV 266 1309 1479 (-) 867 Increase/Decrease due to Additional Capitalisation (-) 2 18 110 (-) 93 Total 17683 17811 18081 15724 Repayments of Loans during the year 1200 1318 1398 1384 Net loan-Closing 16483 16493 16683 14340 Average Net Loan 16952 16488 16588 15511 Rate of Interest on Loan 7.41% 6.34% 5.85% 5.67% Interest on loan* 1256 1045 970 879
* The amount reflects the payment for the whole year. For part of the year, pro-rata payments shall be made.
DEPRECIATION
19. The details of depreciation amount as furnished in the petition up to 31.3.1992 as per the accounts maintained have been taken into account. Depreciation recovered in tariff from 1.4.1992 to 31.3.1997 as notified by Ministry of Power has also been taken into account. Ministry of Power had allowed depreciation @ 7.92% and the same rate has been followed for the purpose of calculation of depreciation from 1.4.1997 to 31.3.2001 The year-wise amount of depreciation to be recovered from the respondents in tariff are detailed below:
(Rs. in lakhs)
Asset Value Rate Depreciation*** 1997–1998 40728 7.92% 3226 1998–1999 (1.4.1998 to 31.10.1998) 41255 7.92% 3267 1998–1999 (1.11.1998 to 31.3.1999) 3267 1999–2000 43909 7.92% 3478 2000–2001 47087 7.92% 3729
*** The figures relate to full year. For part of the year pro-rata payment shall be made.
O&M EXPENSES
20. Keeping in view the methodology adopted by the Ministry of Power for various stations of NTPC, the actual O&M expenses of Rs. 1509 lakhs, including water charges for the year 1996–1997 as per the audited balance sheet in respect of Anta GPS has been taken as the base and an escalation factor of 10% per annum has been applied to work out O&M expenses for the year 1997–1998 to 2000–2001. In the light of the above, water charges have not been considered separately. Based on this methodology, the charges payable by the beneficiaries on account of O&M are as under:
(Rs. in lakhs) @
1997–1998 1659 1998–1999 (1.4.1998 to 31.10.1998) 1825 1998–1999 (1.11.1998 to 31.3.1999) 1825 1999–2000 2008 2000–2001 2209
@ The amount relates to full year. For part of the year, pro-rata payments shall be made.
INTEREST ON WORKING CAPITAL
21. Working capital has been calculated considering the following elements:
(a) Fuel Cost and Naptha stock: In line with the practice followed by Gol, Naptha stock as given in the audited balance sheet for the year 1996–1997 in the inventory schedule as “fuel oil” has been considered for computing the working capital. The petitioner has furnished the GCV of fuels vide affidavit dated 8.10.2002 Since the variable charge is not being revised and the order is for Revised Fixed charges for the period 1.4.1997 to 31.2.2001, the fuel cost as considered by the Central Government in its notification dated 30.4.1994 has been taken into account.
(b) O&M Expenses: O&M expenses for working capital has been considered for 1 month of the respective year.
(c) Spares: The actual spares for the year 1996–1997 as per the audited balance sheet of Anta GPS have been considered in the working for the years 1997–1998 to 2000–2001.
(d) Receivables: Receivables have been worked out on the basis of two months of fixed and variable charges. In view of the position explained in sub-para (a) above, variable charges component of the receivables in the working capital have been estimated on the basis of variable charge in the previous tariff period. The fixed charge component of the receivables are based on the calculations for the current tariff period.
22. Based on the above, the details of working capital considered are as given hereunder:
WORKING CAPITAL
(Rs. in lakhs)
1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 1.4.98 to 31.10.98 1.11.98 to 31.3.1999 Fuel cost 1231 1231 1231 1231 1231 Cost of Nathpa (Fuel oil) stock 45 45 45 45 45 O&M expenses 138 152 152 167 184 Spares 177 177 177 177 177 Receivables 4021 4028 4176 4262 4328 Total 5611 5632 5780 5881 5964
23. Ministry of Power in its notification dated 30.4.1994 had considered the working capital margin of Rs. 8.60 crores. This has been followed for the purpose of calculating working capital for the years 1997–1998 to 2000–2001. The average SBI PLR of the respective year has been considered as the rate of interest on working capital. The rate of interest adopted during the years 1997–1998, 1998–1999, 1999–2000 and 2000–2001 is 14%, 13%, 12% and 11.5% respectively against rate of interest of 14.21% claimed in the petition. Based on the above methodology, the year-wise details of interest on working capital payable by the respondents to the petitioner are as under:
(Rs. in lakhs) @@
1997–1998 749 1998–1999 (1.4.1998 to 31.10.1998) 699 1998–1999 (1.11.1998 to 31.3.1999) 736 1999–2000 697 2000–2001 680
@@ The amount relates to the whole year. For part of the year, prorata payments shall be made.
24. Annual fixed charges for the period 1.4.1997 to 31.3.2001 are allowed as below:
(Rs. in lakhs)
Particulars 1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 1.4.1998 to 31.10.1998 1.11.1998 to 31.3.1999 1 Interest on Loan 1256 1045 1045 970 879 2 Interest on Working Capital 749 699 736 697 680 3 Depreciation 3226 3267 3267 3478 3729 4 Return on Equity 2460 2555 3407 3640 3690 5 O&M Expenses 1659 1825 1825 2008 2209 Total 9350 9391 10280 10793 11187
The payments for part of the year shall be made on pro-rata basis.
25. The fixed charges decided by us in the preceding para shall be shared by the respondents in the ratio of energy drawn from Anta GPS during the relevant period. The petitioner has already recovered fixed charges from the respondents in view of continuation of tariff notification dated 30.4.1994 on ad-hoc basis beyond 31.3.1997 The amount already recovered shall be adjusted against the fixed charges decided by us through this order.
26. The petitioner has not indicated energy charges payable in the respective year and it has been stated that it is not required as the tariff is for the past period and recalculation will have no effect because operational norms remain unchanged. The respondents also did not raise the issue during the pleadings.
27. This order disposes of Petition No. 36/2002.
Alert