TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 439
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i in I.T.A.No.853/Mds/2013 for the assessment year 2006-07. 2.The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration:- "(i) Whether the Software License Fees and Maintenance Fees paid by the Assessee is Capital expenditure or Revenue expenditure? (ii) Whether the license fee paid by the assessee for purchase of software which enhances the efficiency of the operation services of its business giving an enduring benefit would be capital expenditure only?" 3.We have heard Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant/Revenue; and Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan, learned counsel accepting notice for the respondent/assessee. 4.The Revenue has assailed the order passed by the Tribunal dated 07.12.2017....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the assessee has not made TDS as per Chapter XVII B of the Income Tax Act on the above payment for the purpose of software. Since, the payment for the purchase of software is tantamount to the payment for the purpose of royalty, the said expenditure cannot be allowed as per the provisions of Section 40(a)(i)/40(a)(ia) of the Income tax Act. He further observed that the purchase of software was made for the purpose of getting enduring benefit of the assessee company. Therefore, the above said expenditure can be treated only as capital expenditure............. 5.1. The appellant contested the above addition. The written submissions of the ld.AR are as follows: "The Appellant paid the software license fees and maintenance fees of Rs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er of Income Tax, Trichy vs. The Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd., [2018-TIOL-1701-HCMAD- IT] and dismissed the tax case appeals filed by the Revenue. This decision of ours has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd., [2019-TIOL-155-SC-IT by which, the delay in filing the special leave petitions before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was condoned and the special leave petitions were dismissed. 9.Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel referred to a decision of the Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Arawali Construction Co. (P) Ltd., reported in [2003] 259 ITR 30 (Rajasthan). 10.We find that in the said case, the payment was not made as consu....