(Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order, dated March 2, 1998, of the Madras High Court in T. C. Nos. 1820 and 1821 of 1986).

(a) Income-tax--

----New industrial undertaking---New industrial undertaking in backward areas---Special deduction---Tyre retreading does not amount to production---Not entitled to relie---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.80HH & 80J.

(b) Words and phrases---

----"Production"---Meaning of.

From the decision of the High Court (see (1999) 239 ITR 375) to the effect (i) that for the purposes of the relief under section 80HH of the Income Tai Act, 1961, there has to be production which brings into existence a new article; and (ii) that when a tyre wears out, its life might be renewed by retreading but a different and distinct commodity cannot be said to have come into existence as a result of retreading, and, therefore, the business of retreading of tyres did not amount to production of a new article entitling the assessee to the relief under sections 801 and 80HH, appeals were preferred by the assessee to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals.

CIT v. Madurai Pandian Engineering Corporation Ltd. (1999) 239 ITR 375 affirmed.

R. Venkataraman, Senior Advocate (V. Prabhakar and Ms. Revathy Raghavan, Advocates with him} for Appellant.

Dr. V. Gauri Shankar, Senior Advocate (Rajiv Tyagi, B.V. Balaram Das and Ms. Sushma Suri, Advocates with him) for Respondent. '

ORDER

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. There is no merit in the appeals. The civil appeals are dismissed with costs.

M.B.A./1067/FC Appeals dismissed.