{"id":384784,"date":"2026-05-21T13:00:35","date_gmt":"2026-05-21T07:30:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=384784"},"modified":"2026-05-21T13:16:40","modified_gmt":"2026-05-21T07:46:40","slug":"aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/","title":{"rendered":"Delays by EPC Contractor and Gas Supplier Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations; Their Cost Cannot Be Passed to Consumers: APTEL"},"content":{"rendered":"<style>\n.animate-charcter{background-image: linear-gradient(-225deg, #231557 0%, #44107a 29%, #ff1361 67%, #fff800 100%); background-size: 200% auto; -webkit-background-clip: text; -webkit-text-fill-color: transparent; animation: textclip 0s linear infinite;}\n@keyframes textclip {to {background-position: 200% center;}}\n<\/style>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Disclaimer:<\/span> <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (Aptel):<\/span> In an appeal challenging the tariff order passed by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) concerning the Tripura Gas Based Power Plant (101 MW), the Division Bench of Virender Bhat, Judicial Member and Ajay Talegaonkar, Technical Member, allowed the appeal filed by Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd., (TSECL) and partly set aside the impugned order to the extent it condoned delays attributable to Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL) and Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC) and permitted capitalisation of the resulting cost escalation. The Tribunal held that delays caused by the generating company&#8217;s contractor and gas supplier were <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">controllable factors<\/span> under the CERC Tariff Regulations, 2014 and therefore the additional burden could not be shifted to consumers.<\/p>\n<h3>Background<\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">In the instant case, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd., (TSECL) and North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd. (NEEPCO), entered into a Power Supply Agreement (PSA) dated 19 March 2008 <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">for establishment of the Tripura Gas Based Power Project<\/span>. Investment approval for the project was granted by the Ministry of Power on 14 July 2009 and as per the approved schedule, the Gas Turbine (GT) was to be completed within 26 months and the Steam Turbine (ST) within 36 months from the zero date, the zero date being reckoned from the date of investment decision.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">For project implementation, NEEPCO awarded the Engineering, Procurement and Construction Contract (EPC) contract to BHEL on 23 July 2010 stipulating commissioning periods of 32 months for GT and 36 months for ST. Subsequently, revised investment approval under RCE-I was accorded on 23 February 2011 at a revised cost of Rs 623.44 crores, including <span style=\"Segoe UI&quot;; font-size: 10.5pt; color: #242424;\">Interest during constructio<\/span> (IDC) of Rs 51.09 crores.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">However, substantial delay occurred in commissioning of the project. While NEEPCO attributed 8 months&#8217; delay to BHEL and further delay of 25 months and 36 months respectively to non-supply of gas by ONGC, the CERC condoned the delay and approved the capital cost claimed by NEEPCO through order dated 4 April 2019. Aggrieved thereby, TSECL preferred the present appeal.<\/p>\n<h3>Issue and Analysis<\/h3>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Issue 1: Whether CERC erred in allowing time overrun of 8 months for GT and ST attributable to BHEL?<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Tribunal noted NEEPCO and CERC relied upon MSPGCL vs MERC, Appeal No. 72 of 2010 (MSPGCL judgment), and that the CERC, in the impugned order, had concluded that there was no imprudence on the part of NEEPCO in selecting BHEL as the EPC contractor and that the delay fell within the category of reasons beyond the control of the generating company.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Tribunal agreed that there was no imprudence in the appointment of BHEL as the EPC contractor. However, the Tribunal observed that the principles laid down in MSPGCL also include imprudence in execution of contractual agreements with terms and conditions of contracts the Tribunal then examined, whether the conduct of NEEPCO in handling the contractual arrangement with BHEL fell within that category.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Tribunal noted the appellant&#8217;s contention that the disputes and arrangements between NEEPCO and BHEL, particularly regarding the transfer of a part of the EPC work to NTPC BHEL Power Projects Private Limited (NBPPL) by the BHEL, were purely bilateral contractual matters and could not justify increasing the capital cost for tariff determination recoverable from beneficiaries who had no role in such arrangements. Referring to <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Coats Viyella India Ltd.<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">India Cement Ltd.<\/span>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/FfN9sMm2\" target=\"_blank\">(2000) 9 SCC 376<\/a>, the Tribunal reiterated the principle that liabilities arising out of contractual arrangements remain confined to the contracting parties and cannot be shifted to third parties merely because of separate arrangements entered into by one of the parties.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">On NEEPCO&#8217;s contention that it had initially opposed BHEL&#8217;s exit and later acted only in compliance with executive instructions issued by the Ministry of Power, the Tribunal observed that the letter dated 26 April 2011 from Ministry of Power was merely a Demi Official (D.O.) letter requesting off-loading of part of the EPC work from BHEL to NBPPL and opined that it could not be treated as an executive instruction.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">For the appellant reliance on the PSA clauses, the Tribunal observed that, <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">the settled position is that regulations on a specific subject can make inroads into the agreements<\/span> [<span style=\"font-style: italic;\">PTC India Ltd.<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">CERC<\/span>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/8tPUFJjw\" target=\"_blank\">(2010) 4 SCC 603<\/a>]. The Tribunal noted that the PSA does not mention completion date but relies on the investment approval for referencing time and cost over-run. It further observed that CERC had rightly computed the time overrun with reference to the Scheduled Commercial Operation Date (SCOD) linked to the investment approval, but erred in overlooking Regulation 12, CERC Tariff Regulations, 2014, which categorises <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">&#8220;Delay in execution of the project on account of contractor, supplier or agency of the generating company or transmission licensee&#8221;<\/span> as a controllable factor. Accordingly, under Regulations 11 and 12 of the CERC&#8217;s own tariff regulation, the escalation in contract price, IDC and Incidental Expenditure during Construction (IEDC) ought not to have been allowed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Tribunal further observed that though the PSA did not specify any completion date, it relied upon the investment approval for determining time and cost overrun. While CERC had rightly computed the time overrun with reference to the SCOD linked to the investment approval, it erred in overlooking Regulation 12, CERC Tariff Regulations, 2014, which categorises delay attributable to the contractor, supplier or agency of the generating company as a controllable factor. Accordingly, under Regulations 11 and 12, escalation in contract price, IDC and IEDC ought not to have been allowed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Tribunal observed that considerable time was consumed in the process of deliberation and approval of the proposal for off-loading part of the EPC work, which contributed to the delay in execution and was attributable, at least partly, to NEEPCO itself. Accordingly, the Tribunal opined that NEEPCO could not absolve itself of responsibility for the 8-month time overrun by attributing it to BHEL and that the consequential escalation in contract prices, IDC and IEDC was liable to be disallowed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"animate-charcter\" style=\"margin-left: 36pt; margin-bottom: 3%; font-weight: bold;\">&#8220;Therefore, we conclude that CERC erred in allowing time over-run of 8 months, which was attributed by NEEPCO to BHEL.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Also Read:<\/span> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/22\/aptel-cag-audit-of-delhi-discoms-without-compliance-statutory-provisions-impermissible\/\" target=\"_blank\">CAG Audit of Delhi DISCOMs Impermissible Without Compliance of Section 20 Conditions; APTEL quashes Lt. Governor&#8217;s Approval<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Issue 2: Whether CERC erred in allowing time overrun of 25 months and 36 months for GT and ST respectively attributable to ONGC?<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Finding the selection of ONGC as the gas supplier to be reasonable, the Tribunal disagreed with the contention of the appellant that NEEPCO could have simply terminated the Gas Supply Agreement (GSA), as at there was no viable alternative supplier or infrastructure in existence at that time, making termination impractical. The Tribunal <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">found a lapse in risk management by NEEPCO<\/span> as it could have secured itself with appropriate penalty clauses for both breach of contract and non-supply of gas, and further found, that either such penalty provision was not there in the GSA or it was not enforced. The Tribunal observed that delay attributable to suppliers also falls within the category of controllable factors under Regulations 11 and 12, CERC Tariff Regulations, 2014.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Tribunal rejected NEEPCO&#8217;s contention that non-supply of gas constituted a force majeure event, holding that the event of non-supply of gas did not fall within the definition of force majeure either under the PSA or under Regulation 3(25), CERC Tariff Regulations, 2014. It further observed that even if non-supply of gas was a force majeure event for ONGC under the GSA, it would not automatically become a force majeure event for NEEPCO in absence of any such provision in the PSA.<\/p>\n<p class=\"animate-charcter\" style=\"margin-left: 36pt; margin-bottom: 3%; font-weight: bold;\">&#8220;We conclude that CERC erred in allowing time over-run of 25 months and 36 months for delay in commercial operation of GT and ST respectively attributable by NEEPCO to the non-supply of gas by ONGC.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Also Read: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/21\/aptel-cerc-review-without-plea-hearing-parties-unsustainable\/\" target=\"_blank\">Power to review judgment or order under Section 114 and Order 47 CPC can&#8217;t be exercised suo moto; APTEL set asides CERC&#8217;s modification order<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Issue 3: Whether CERC erred in allowing the cost-overrun?<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Tribunal observed Clause 3.2 of the PSA requires in-principal approval including capital cost, from the appropriate authority, and since the Ministry of Power granted the original approval (2009) and Revised Cost Estimate (RCE-I) 2011, it is the competent authority. The clause also makes it clear that no time or cost overrun attributable to NEEPCO shall be entertained by TSECL. &#8220;<span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">This effectively means that the capital cost contained in such approval will be the ceiling limit.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Finding the appellant argument as valid the Tribunal noted that CERC erred in treating a recommendatory letter as revised approved cost (RCE-II) or the revised investment approval.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Reiterating that regulations override contractual provisions, the Tribunal observed, capital cost in RCE\u00e2\u20ac\u2018I would not automatically a ceiling, however, under Regulation 10(4), any agreed ceiling in the PPA must be considered, requiring CERC to conduct a prudence check with RCE\u00e2\u20ac\u2018I as reference (after price adjustment). Further, as per Regulation 12, delays caused by contractors or suppliers are controllable factors; hence, since delays attributable to BHEL and ONGC are disallowed, the associated IDC, IEDC, and any cost escalation must also be denied. Consequently, any gains such as performance guarantees, liquidated damages, penalties, or insurance proceeds relating to such delay shall be retained by NEEPCO.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Tribunal observed that although regulatory provisions override contractual terms and the capital cost in RCE\u00e2\u20ac\u2018I cannot be treated as an automatic ceiling, Regulation 10(4) mandates that any ceiling agreed under the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) must be duly considered, accordingly, CERC ought to have undertaken a prudence check of the capital cost with RCE\u00e2\u20ac\u2018I as the reference, after suitable adjustment for price levels. The Tribunal further noted, in light of Regulation 12, that delays attributable to contractors or suppliers fall within controllable factors, therefore, since the delay linked to BHEL and ONGC had already been disallowed, the associated IDC, IEDC, and any cost escalation arising therefrom were also liable to be disallowed and any amount received towards performance guarantees, liquidated damages, penalties, or insurance proceeds arising out of such delay shall be retained by NEEPCO. It further observed that the appellant&#8217;s act of signing the reconciliation statement as on 31 December 2022 merely reflected the legal position prevailing in the absence of any stay on the impugned order and did not amount to a waiver of its right to challenge the same in appeal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"animate-charcter\" style=\"margin-left: 36pt; margin-bottom: 3%; font-weight: bold;\">&#8220;Therefore, in view of the forging we conclude that the prudence of the capital cost needs to be checked with reference to RCE-I and not in accordance with cost mentioned in the letter dated 14-6-2017 vetted by CEA. The RCE-I was at 2010 price level and therefore the capital cost mentioned in it has to be brought to the appropriate price level. Further, any cost escalation impacting Contract Prices due to delay also need to be disallowed.&#8221;<\/p>\n<h3>Order<\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the CERC order to the extent it condoned the 8 month delay attributable to BHEL, the delay caused by non-supply of gas by ONGC, and the consequential capitalisation of escalation in contract prices, IDC and IEDC arising from such delays. The matter was remanded to CERC for fresh tariff determination with a direction to undertake a prudence check of the capital cost using RCE\u00e2\u20ac\u2018I as the reference (after suitable adjustment to the relevant price level), while excluding any cost escalation arising from controllable delays.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\"><span style=\"font-style: italic;\">TSECL<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">NEEPCO<\/span>, App No. 184 of 2020, decided on 14-5-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the appellant:<\/span> Basava Prabhu Patil, Sr. Adv., Alabhya Dhamija, Vikas Maini, Samarth Kashyap, Ranjeet Mishra<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the respondent:<\/span> Ranjitha Ramachandran, Poorva Saigal, Anushree Bardhan, Shubham Arya, Arvind Kumar Dubey, Sethu Ramalingam<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">Delay attributable to suppliers falling in the category of controllable factors is equally applicable in accordance with Regulations 11 and 12, CERC Tariff Regulations, 2014.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":384788,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[8991,31438,39198,31959,104879,43755,104877,104876,104878],"class_list":["post-384784","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-appeal","tag-appellate-tribunal-for-electricity","tag-bhel","tag-cerc","tag-north-eastern-electric-power-corporation-ltd","tag-ongc","tag-tariff-determination","tag-tariff-order","tag-tripura-state-electricity-corporation-ltd"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.4 (Yoast SEO v27.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Contractor and Gas Supplier Delays Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations: APTEL | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"APTEL sets aside CERC order approving escalated tariff for Tripura Gas Based Power Plant, holding that delays by EPC contractor BHEL and gas supplier ONGC were controllable factors under CERC Tariff Regulations 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delays by EPC Contractor and Gas Supplier Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations; Their Cost Cannot Be Passed to Consumers: APTEL\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"APTEL sets aside CERC order approving escalated tariff for Tripura Gas Based Power Plant, holding that delays by EPC contractor BHEL and gas supplier ONGC were controllable factors under CERC Tariff Regulations 2014\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-05-21T07:30:35+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-05-21T07:46:40+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Delays by EPC Contractor and Gas Supplier Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations; Their Cost Cannot Be Passed to Consumers: APTEL\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"Delays by EPC Contractor and Gas Supplier Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations; Their Cost Cannot Be Passed to Consumers: APTEL\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-21T07:30:35+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-21T07:46:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1936,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"Appeal\",\"appellate tribunal for electricity\",\"BHEL\",\"CERC\",\"North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd.\",\"ONGC\",\"Tariff determination\",\"Tariff Order\",\"Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd.\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"Tribunals\\\/Commissions\\\/Regulatory Bodies\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/\",\"name\":\"Contractor and Gas Supplier Delays Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations: APTEL | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-21T07:30:35+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-21T07:46:40+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"APTEL sets aside CERC order approving escalated tariff for Tripura Gas Based Power Plant, holding that delays by EPC contractor BHEL and gas supplier ONGC were controllable factors under CERC Tariff Regulations 2014\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Controllable factors under CERC Tariff Regulations\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/21\\\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delays by EPC Contractor and Gas Supplier Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations; Their Cost Cannot Be Passed to Consumers: APTEL\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Contractor and Gas Supplier Delays Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations: APTEL | SCC Times","description":"APTEL sets aside CERC order approving escalated tariff for Tripura Gas Based Power Plant, holding that delays by EPC contractor BHEL and gas supplier ONGC were controllable factors under CERC Tariff Regulations 2014","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delays by EPC Contractor and Gas Supplier Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations; Their Cost Cannot Be Passed to Consumers: APTEL","og_description":"APTEL sets aside CERC order approving escalated tariff for Tripura Gas Based Power Plant, holding that delays by EPC contractor BHEL and gas supplier ONGC were controllable factors under CERC Tariff Regulations 2014","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-05-21T07:30:35+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-05-21T07:46:40+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Delays by EPC Contractor and Gas Supplier Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations; Their Cost Cannot Be Passed to Consumers: APTEL","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"Delays by EPC Contractor and Gas Supplier Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations; Their Cost Cannot Be Passed to Consumers: APTEL","datePublished":"2026-05-21T07:30:35+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-21T07:46:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/"},"wordCount":1936,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.webp","keywords":["Appeal","appellate tribunal for electricity","BHEL","CERC","North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd.","ONGC","Tariff determination","Tariff Order","Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd."],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","Tribunals\/Commissions\/Regulatory Bodies"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/","name":"Contractor and Gas Supplier Delays Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations: APTEL | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.webp","datePublished":"2026-05-21T07:30:35+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-21T07:46:40+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"APTEL sets aside CERC order approving escalated tariff for Tripura Gas Based Power Plant, holding that delays by EPC contractor BHEL and gas supplier ONGC were controllable factors under CERC Tariff Regulations 2014","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Controllable factors under CERC Tariff Regulations"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/21\/aptel-delay-by-contractor-and-supplier-controllable-factors-under-cerc-tariff-regulations\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delays by EPC Contractor and Gas Supplier Are Controllable Factors Under CERC Tariff Regulations; Their Cost Cannot Be Passed to Consumers: APTEL"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Controllable-factors-under-CERC-Tariff-Regulations.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/384784","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=384784"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/384784\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":384790,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/384784\/revisions\/384790"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/384788"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=384784"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=384784"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=384784"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}