- (1.) ON an application filed under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court: "Whether, the Tribunal was justified in holding that for charging of interest under Sections 139 and 217 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, a direction to this effect in the assessment order itself was necessary particularly when the Income Tax Officer under his own signatures in the assessment form of even date has charged the interest under Sections 139 and 217 of the Act -
(2.) AT the outset, learned counsel for the assessee, Mr. Mathur, submits that this issue is covered by the decision of this court in the case of CIT v. , as well as by the decision of the apex court in the case of CIT v. : [2001]247ITR209(SC) . In the case of CIT v. : [2001]247ITR209(SC) , the appeal was filed against the decision of the High Court wherein the High Court has taken the view that when the Assessing Officer in the assessment order has not charged interest and when the charge of interest has not been specifically stated in the assessment order, after that the order charging the interest in demand notice is contrary to the provisions of law and the Assessing Officer cannot levy interest under Sections 139 and 217 of the Act. A Similar view has been taken by this court in the case of CIT v. .
(3.) CONSIDERING the decisions relied upon by Mr. Mathur, we find no infirmity in the order of the Tribunal.;