The Supreme Court has held that electricity regulatory commissions possess authority to determine power tariffs but must ensure that such determinations do not defeat government policy intent. A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar delivered the judgment in a case concerning incentives for wind energy projects. The court examined whether regulators could factor central subsidies into tariff calculations and concluded that such practice could undermine policy objectives. The outcome clarifies the limits of regulatory discretion in tariff matters. The court reaffirmed that commissions including the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission and state electricity regulatory commissions have exclusive jurisdiction over tariff setting under the Electricity Act. The ruling reiterated the statutory independence of regulators in managing pricing structures across the power sector. At the same time the judgment made clear that regulatory autonomy is not absolute. The ruling underscores the importance of transparent methodology in tariff determinations and consistent implementation. The bench stated that regulatory decisions must be consistent with policy directions issued by the government particularly where incentives are intended to promote capacity addition for clean energy. The court found that the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission erred by adjusting tariffs downward after accounting for a central subsidy aimed at encouraging renewable investment. That adjustment was held to have effectively frustrated the policy purpose of the incentive. The court indicated that incentives must deliver intended support to developers. The judgment emphasised the need for coordination between regulators and policymakers as India scales up renewable deployment. It established that while tariff setting remains a regulatory function it must operate within the broader framework of government policy and sectoral goals. The decision is likely to guide future tariff determinations and dispute resolution between state commissions and central policymakers. Observers suggested the decision will prompt closer engagement between policymakers and regulators.