https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16349 The High Court of Madras ruled that the assessee, a partnership firm in the tannery and export business, was not entitled to relief under section 80J of the Income-tax Act for using machinery previously owned by another firm. However, the Court granted relief under section 80HH for machinery not previously used in a backward area. The decision aligned with the Supreme Court's interpretation in Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT, emphasizing that relief under section 80J does not apply when machinery previously used by a third party is transferred to a new industrial undertaking. en-us Tue, 03 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Sep 2009 11:58:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16349 The High Court of Madras ruled that the assessee, a partnership firm in the tannery and export business, was not entitled to relief under section 80J of the Income-tax Act for using machinery previously owned by another firm. However, the Court granted relief under section 80HH for machinery not previously used in a backward area. The decision aligned with the Supreme Court's interpretation in Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT, emphasizing that relief under section 80J does not apply when machinery previously used by a third party is transferred to a new industrial undertaking. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 03 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16349