In coming to this conclusion, I rely on the pronouncement
in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313
ITR 340), Sahibag Entrepreneure Vs. ITO (50 ITD 113)
(Ahd), CIT Vs. Shoorj Vallbdas and Co. (46 ITR 144)(SC) and
Highway Constructions (Co.)(P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (199 ITR 702)
(Guwahati), wherein it has been held that in the absence of
nexus no proportionate disallowance of interest expenses
is warranted.
For that
purpose, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Hon'ble
Rajasthan High Court in the case of Aravalli Construction Company Ltd
vs CIT, 259 ITR 30, wherein it has been held that the expenditure of
software will constitute capital expenditure only and that even if they
are standardized and not specifically custom made will not alter the
situation.
5. Though several contentions have been urged
by both sides in support of their respective claims, without
expressing any opinion on the mertis/demerits of the rival
contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this
petition directing the petitioner to submit a comprehensive
4
representation ventilating all its grievances to the
respondents within two weeks. If the petitioner submits one
more representation along with relevant documents, the
respondents shall address the grievances of the petitioner
and consider and pass appropriate orders/take appropriate
decision bearing in mind the judgment of this Court dated
01.04.2022 passed in W.P.No.14615/2021 (M/s. Yojaka
(India) Pvt Ltd.) Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of
Income Tax) as well as the representations dated
02.05.2022 and 07.07.2022 at Annexures-J and K, in
accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the
date of submission of the representation.