SCM Creations v. ACIT

304 ITR 319High Court2008#7394 most cited

What is SCM Creations v. ACIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer's action, following the Madras High Court's ratio in SCM Creations v. ACIT, regarding the interplay of Section 80HHC(AB) and Section 80IB, cannot be interfered with by the PCIT if it corrects an erroneous view. Divergent views on such issues can lead to a Larger Bench constitution, indicating that multiple interpretations are permissible.

15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

SCM Creations v. ACIT · 304 ITR 319 · Section 80HHC · Section 80IB · Section 80HHC(AB) · Assessing Officer · PCIT · revision · erroneous assessment · divergent views · Larger Bench

Judgments citing SCM Creations v. ACIT

Shital Fibers Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

C.A. No.-014318-014318 - 2015Supreme Court20 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 80

…C were disallowed. 7. The appeal preferred by the appellant against the said Order was dismissed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). In appeal preferred by the appellant before the ITAT, the appellant was unsuccessful. Thereafter, an appeal was 3 304 ITR 319 Civil Appeal No.14318 of 2015 etc. Page 3 of 20 preferred before the Punjab and Haryana High Court which came to be dismissed by the impugned judgment and order. The High Court relied upon its own decision in the case of Friends Casting (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax4. Th…

K.G. Denim Limited, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Tp-2(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1718/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1718/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 K G Denim Limited, Dcit, 1, Thenthirumalai, V. Tp-2(1), Jadayampalayam B.O., Chennai. Dhoddabavi, Coimbatore – 641 302. [Pan: Aaack-7940-C] (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Arjun Raj, Advocate : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Arjun Raj, Advocate
Section 263Section 263(1)(c)Section 801A

…) and Section 80IB of the Act had held that the action of the Assessing Officer in following the ratio of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of (SCM :-11-: ITA. No: 1718/Chny/2024 Creations vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax) reported in [2008] 304 ITR 319 cannot be interfered with by the PCIT by holding that the failure to observe the ratio of the Madras High Court in the case of (General Optics (Asia) Ltd., vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax) reported [2009] 315 ITR 400 would constitute the same as erroneous and prejudice to the interest of the revenue. The Madras High Court in the above menti…

Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Ltd ( Successors to Intec Polymers Ltd), Chennai vs. ACIT RG 3(2)

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in term of the above

ITA 3651/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2023AY 2004-2005
For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 801BSection 80HSection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘डी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./ITA Nos.: 3650 & 3651/MUM/2008 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Sanmar Speciality Chemicals The ACIT, Ltd., vs. Range 3(2), (Successors to Intec Polymers Mumbai. Ltd.,) 9, Cathedral Road, Chennai – 600 086. PAN: AAACI 2638D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से…

Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Ltd ( Successors to Intec Polymers Ltd), Chennai vs. ACIT RG 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in term of the above

ITA 3650/MUM/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2023AY 2003-2004
For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 801BSection 80HSection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘डी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./ITA Nos.: 3650 & 3651/MUM/2008 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Sanmar Speciality Chemicals The ACIT, Ltd., vs. Range 3(2), (Successors to Intec Polymers Mumbai. Ltd.,) 9, Cathedral Road, Chennai – 600 086. PAN: AAACI 2638D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से…

M/S Sutures India Pvt Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result the substantial questions of law are

ITA/115/2010HC Karnataka13 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 80HSection 80I

…be allowed after deduction of the amount of profit allowed as deduction under Section 80IB of the Act? 3 (iii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in not following the decision of Madras High Court in the case of SCM Creations Vs. ACIT (2008) 304 ITR 319 (Mad), but followed the decision of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Hindustan Mint and Agro Products (P) Ltd. (2009) 199 ITD 107 (Delhi)? (iv) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that at the time of filing audit report in form 10CCB along with the return was mandatory in nature on the facts and circumstances of the case?"…

Atlas Metal Processors P Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for the assessment years

ITA 1995/CHNY/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. P. Muthushankar, JCIT
Section 80Section 801ASection 80HSection 80ISection 80l

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,’ बी (SMC) ’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B(SMC)” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस .गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1994 & 1995/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2001-02 & 2004-05 M/s. Atlas Metal Processors P. Ltd., Assistant Commissioner of Income 29/69, Eldams Road, Vs. Tax, Teynampet, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai – 600 018. Chennai. [PAN: AAACA 7401Q] (#$यथ&/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : Shri. M. Karunakaran, Advocate अपीला…

Atlas Metal Processors P Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for the assessment years

ITA 1994/CHNY/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. P. Muthushankar, JCIT
Section 80Section 801ASection 80HSection 80ISection 80l

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,’ बी (SMC) ’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B(SMC)” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस .गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1994 & 1995/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2001-02 & 2004-05 M/s. Atlas Metal Processors P. Ltd., Assistant Commissioner of Income 29/69, Eldams Road, Vs. Tax, Teynampet, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai – 600 018. Chennai. [PAN: AAACA 7401Q] (#$यथ&/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : Shri. M. Karunakaran, Advocate अपीला…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Eastern Medikit Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2259/DEL/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh.H.S.Sidhu & Sh. N. K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2001-02

Section 115Section 143Section 271Section 80Section 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH.H.S.SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2001-02 ACIT M/s. Eastern Medikit Ltd Circle – 8 (2) Vs 3, G. C. Narang Marg, New Delhi New Delhi PAN No.AAACE0706G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr DR Respondent by None Date of hearing: 21/02/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 21/02/2019 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the revenue preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-14, New Delhi dated 23.01.2015 pertaining to A. Y. 2001- 02. 2. The solitary grievance of the r…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Tuticorin

ITA 1665/CHNY/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 271ASection 80Section 80H

…uting deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The judgment of ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 Madras High Court in SCM Creations v. ACIT (2008) 304 ITR 319 would cover the issue. Accordingly, the orders of lower authorities are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue in the light of the judgment of Madras High Court in SCM Creations (supra) after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 6. The next ground of appeal arises for consideration is with regard to in…

M/S. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Madurai vs. Additional CIT, Chennai

ITA 1386/CHNY/2010[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 271ASection 80Section 80H

…uting deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The judgment of ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 Madras High Court in SCM Creations v. ACIT (2008) 304 ITR 319 would cover the issue. Accordingly, the orders of lower authorities are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue in the light of the judgment of Madras High Court in SCM Creations (supra) after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 6. The next ground of appeal arises for consideration is with regard to in…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Tuticorin

ITA 1020/CHNY/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 271ASection 80Section 80H

…uting deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The judgment of ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 Madras High Court in SCM Creations v. ACIT (2008) 304 ITR 319 would cover the issue. Accordingly, the orders of lower authorities are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue in the light of the judgment of Madras High Court in SCM Creations (supra) after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 6. The next ground of appeal arises for consideration is with regard to in…

M/S Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Tuticorin vs. DCIT, Chennai

ITA 86/CHNY/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 271ASection 80Section 80H

…uting deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The judgment of ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 Madras High Court in SCM Creations v. ACIT (2008) 304 ITR 319 would cover the issue. Accordingly, the orders of lower authorities are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue in the light of the judgment of Madras High Court in SCM Creations (supra) after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 6. The next ground of appeal arises for consideration is with regard to in…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Tuticorin

ITA 319/CHNY/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 271ASection 80Section 80H

…uting deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The judgment of ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 Madras High Court in SCM Creations v. ACIT (2008) 304 ITR 319 would cover the issue. Accordingly, the orders of lower authorities are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue in the light of the judgment of Madras High Court in SCM Creations (supra) after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 6. The next ground of appeal arises for consideration is with regard to in…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Chennai

ITA 318/CHNY/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 271ASection 80Section 80H

…uting deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The judgment of ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 Madras High Court in SCM Creations v. ACIT (2008) 304 ITR 319 would cover the issue. Accordingly, the orders of lower authorities are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue in the light of the judgment of Madras High Court in SCM Creations (supra) after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 6. The next ground of appeal arises for consideration is with regard to in…

Great Eastern Exports vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/267/2008HC Delhi29 Nov 2010

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

…ai ITAT (supra) the issue ITA 267 OF 2008, ITA 1316 OF 2008, ITA 4 OF 2009, Page 18 of 37 ITA 907 OF 2009, ITA 906 OF 2008, ITA 1002 OF 2008 came up for consideration before the Madras High Court in the case of SCM Creations Vs. ACIT (2008) 304 ITR 319 wherein a similar issue as involved before the Special Bench of Chennai ITAT was considered and decided. 19. However, the controversy still persisted as various nuances of the provisions were argued and there was a controversy about the ratio of S.C.M. decision of Madras High Court and in these circumstances, a five member Special Bench o…

SCM Creations v. ACIT (304 ITR 319) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax