Judgment :- R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J. Two questions have been referred to us for the assessment year 1981-82. The first question (Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is not entitled to deduction under section 80HH of the Income-tax Act in respect of certain items of income namely sale of scraps, gunny bags, interest receipt, etc. ?) referred is the assessee's entitlement to deduction under section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the sale of scraps, gunny bags, interest receipt, etc. The Tribunal has held that the assessee is not entitled to that deduction. So far as interest receipt is concerned, in a case concerning the assessee for an earlier year, it was held that no deduction can be claimed in respect of that item for the purpose of calculating deduction under section 80HH of the Act. That case is the case of CIT v. Pandian Chemicals Ltd. So far as the other items mentioned such as scraps and gunny bags, no details have been given. There is nothing to show that these items were necessary by-products in the process of manufacture and that the amount realised from the sale were capable of being regarded as income from the industrial undertaking. The Tribunal was, therefore, right in rejecting those claims as well. The first question is answered against the assessee. The second question (Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that no appeal was competent under section 246 of the Income-tax Act as far as the claim of interest under section 214 of the Income-tax Act was concerned ?) referred is regarding the maintainability of an appeal under section 246 of the Income-tax Act as far as the claim of interest under section 214 of the Income-tax Act was concerned. As admittedly there were other questions raised by the assessee along with the question regarding interest, such levy was clearly capable of being questioned in an appeal, as has been held in the case of Rajyam Pictures v. Addl. CIT. That question is, therefore, answered in favour of the assessee.