Omnicore Weekly #247 - 20 February 2026

Dear Patrons & Readers,

Approval under Section 62 read with Section 79(1)(d) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and under Regulation 15(1)(a) and Regulation 23 of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2023 for the truing up of the transmission tariff for the 2019-24 tariff period under the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2019 and for the determination of the transmission tariff for the 2024-29 tariff period under the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2024 for asset under “Korba-Budhipadar Transmission System” in the Western Region.

Power Grid Corporation of India Limited,

Versus

Madhya Pradesh Power Management Company Limited, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited, Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited & 3 Others

Background:

The instant Petition has been filed by Power Grid Corporation of India Limited for truing up of the transmission tariff for the 2019-24 tariff period under the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2019 Tariff Regulations”) and the determination of the transmission tariff under the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2024 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2024 Tariff Regulations”) for the 2024-29 tariff period in respect of “Korba-Budhipadar Transmission System” (hereinafter referred to as the “transmission asset”) in the Western Region:

2. The Petitioner has made the following prayers in the instant Petition:

“a) Approve the trued-up Transmission Tariff for 2019-24 block and transmission tariff for 2024-29 block for the assets covered under this petition, as per para 14 and 15 above.

b) Admit the capital cost claimed and additional capitalization incurred during 2019-24.

c) Allow the petitioner to recover the shortfall or refund the excess Annual Fixed Charges, on account of Return on Equity due to change in applicable Minimum Alternate/Corporate Income Tax rate as per the Income Tax Act, 1961 (as amended from time to time) of the respective financial year directly without making any application before the Commission as provided in Tariff Regulations 2019 and Tariff Regulations, 2024 as per para 14 and 15 above for respective block.

d) Approve the reimbursement of expenditure by the beneficiaries towards petition filing fee, and expenditure on publishing of notices in newspapers in terms of Regulation 94 (1) Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2024, and other expenditure (if any) in relation to the filing of petition.

e) Allow the petitioner to bill and recover RLDC fees & charges and Licensee fee separately from the respondents in terms of Regulation 94 (3) and (4) Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2024.

f) Allow the petitioner to bill and adjust impact on Interest on Loan due to change in Interest rate on account of floating rate of interest applicable during 2024-29 period, if any, from the respondents.

g) Allow the petitioner to file a separate petition before the Commission for claiming the overall security expenses and consequential IOWC on that security expenses as mentioned at para 21 above.

h) Allow the petitioner to file a separate petition before the Commission for claiming the overall insurance expenses and consequential IOWC on that insurance expenses as mentioned at para 21 above.

i) Allow the petitioner to file a separate petition before the Commission for claiming the overall capital spares as per actual as mentioned at Para 21 above.

j) Allow the petitioner to claim expenses of CTUIL borne by POWERGRID through a separate petition as mentioned at para 22 above.

k) Allow the Petitioner to bill and recover GST on Transmission Charges separately from the respondents, if GST on transmission is levied at any rate in future. Further, any taxes including GST and duties including cess etc. imposed by any statutory/Govt./municipal authorities shall be allowed to be recovered from the beneficiaries.

and pass such other relief as the Commission deems fit and appropriate under the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”

3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

a. The ‘in-principle’ approval for implementation of the 220 kV S/C Korba Budhipadar transmission system, to transmit surplus power from the Eastern Region to Western Region was accorded by the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) vide its letter dated 24.7.1997. The Board of Directors (BoD) of the Petitioner Company in its 67th meeting held on 17.9.1997 accorded the Investment Approval (IA) for the transmission asset for ₹3064.00 lakh including an IDC of ₹84.00 lakh. The approval for the Revised Cost Estimate of ₹3553.00 lakh was subsequently accorded by the BoD in its 101st meeting held on 22.2.2000.

b. The scope of the work covered under the transmission asset are as follows:

i. Korba- Budhipadar 220 kV S/C line

ii. Extension of 220 kV existing Sub-station at Budhipadar

iii. Extension of 220/132 kV existing Sub-station at Korba

c. The entire scope of work is covered in the instant Petition.

d. The transmission tariff from 1.4.2001 to 31.3.2004 was determined vide order dated 18.7.2003 in Petition No. 49/2002. The tariff was revised on account of FERV adjustment vide order dated 17.1.2008 in Petition No. 49/2002.

e. The tariff in respect of the transmission asset from 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2009 was determined vide order dated 16.3.2006 in Petition No. 69/2004 and further revised on account of FERV adjustment vide order dated 29.4.2008 in Petition No. 69/2004.

f. The transmission tariff for the transmission asset from 1.4.2009 to 31.3.2014 was determined vide order dated 15.9.2010 in Petition No. 07/2010. Further, the tariff for the 2009-14 period was trued-up and tariff for the period from 1.4.2014 to 31.3.2019 was determined vide order dated 7.10.2015 in Petition No. 162/TT/2014.

g. Further, based on the APTEL’s judgments dated 22.1.2007 in Appeal No. 81/2005 and batch matters and 13.6.2007 in Appeal No. 139 of 2006 and batch matters, the Commission revised the transmission tariff for the 2001- 04 period, 2004-09 period and 2009-14 period, trued-up the Annual Fixed Charges for the 2014-19 period and determined the AFC for the 2019-24 period vide order dated 21.9.2021 in Petition No. 326/TT/2020.

h. The Petitioner has filed the instant Petition for truing-up of the AFC for the 2019-24 tariff period and determination of the AFC for the 2024-29 tariff period.

4. The details of date of commercial operation (COD) in respect of the transmission assets.

5. The Respondents are the distribution licensees, power departments and transmission licensees, who are procuring transmission services from the Petitioner, mainly the beneficiaries of the Western Region.

6. The Petitioner has served the Petition on the Respondents and notice regarding the filing of this Petition has also been published in the newspapers in accordance with Section 64 of the Electricity Act, 2003. No comments or suggestions have been received from the general public in response to the aforesaid notices published in the newspapers by the Petitioner. Madhya Pradesh Power Management Company Limited (MPPMCL), Respondent No. 1, has filed its reply vide affidavit dated 12.12.2025 and has raised the issues of grossing-up of Return on Equity (RoE), Additional Capital Expenditure (ACE), determining the tariff for the 2024-29 period after prudence check, effect of GST and Sharing of Transmission Charges, licensee fee and RLDC fees & charges, interest on loan and security expenses and consequential IWC. No reply has been filed by the Petitioner in response to the MPPMCL’s reply.

7. The hearing in this matter was held on 19.12.2025 and the order was reserved.

8. This order is issued considering the submissions made by the Petitioner in the Petition vide affidavit dated 10.12.2024 and subsequent affidavits dated 31.7.2025 and 5.1.2026 and MPPMCL’s reply vide affidavit dated 12.12.2025.

9. Further, it has been noted that MPPMCL has raised the issues of allowing tariff for the 2024-29 period after prudence check, grossing up of RoE, CGST, and sharing of the transmission charges in its reply repeatedly despite clear findings of the Commission in various orders including in Petition Nos. 401/TT/2024, 25/TT/2025, 1/TT/2025, 406/TT/2025, etc. Since, the issues raised by MPPMCL and the clarifications filed by the Petitioner have already been dealt with by the Commission in the aforementioned Petitions, the same are not being discussed in the instant order. The other issues raised by MPPMCL have been considered in the succeeding paragraphs of this order.

Highlights from the week of
13 February 2026 to 20 February 2026