JUDGMENT D.V. Sylendra Kumar, J. 1. THIS is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, at the instance of the assessee in which the question posed for our answer is as under : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that interest under Section 214 was to be allowed on 'assessed tax' as against 'tax determined on regular assessment' in view of the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act which came into effect with effect from April 1, 1985 ?" 2. THE brief facts leading to the above reference as stated in the statement of case, as gathered from the submissions made by learned counsel for the Revenue and the assessee are that in respect of the assessment year 1984-85, the return filed by the assessee indicated that advance tax to the tune of Rs. 53,00,000 had been paid on behalf of the assessee and further a sum of Rs. 4,22,544 had been deducted at source from out of the amount payable to the assessee and remitted to the credit of the Department by persons responsible for such payment and deduction. THE assessment order had been passed by the Income-tax Officer as per order dated April 30, 1986. Though this is not made part of the papers forwarded by the Appellate Tribunal, Sri Seshachala, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue, has made available a copy of the same before this court. THE controversy arose in the context of entitlement of interest on the amount of refund found due to the assessee on the passing of this assessment order. Though the Assessing Officer indicated a sum of Rs. 7,63,329 was the amount of refund due, being the difference between the assessed tax and the advance tax paid, on passing of the assessment order, no interest was allowed on this refund amount. The assessee, being aggrieved by the same, appears to have preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-IV, and by an order dated June 30, 1988, the said appeal was disposed of, inter alia, among various other aspects including the question relating to grant of interest on the refund amount of Rs. 7,63,329 under the provisions of Section 214. The assessee, being aggrieved by the same, appears to have preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-IV, and by an order dated June 30, 1988, the said appeal was disposed of, inter alia, among various other aspects including the question relating to grant of interest on the refund amount of Rs. 7,63,329 under the provisions of Section 214. In so far as the interest on the refund is concerned, the Appellate Commissioner remanded the matter to the assessing authority, directing the assessing authority to consider this aspect of award of interest under Section 214 inasmuch as the Assessing Officer had not discussed anything at all regarding the entitlement of interest on the refund due to the assessee under the provisions of Section 214 of the Act. 3. THE Assessing Officer, on such remand, considered this aspect of the matter and as per the order dated September 7, 1988, allowed interest on an amount which was the difference between Rs. 53,00,000 which was paid by way of advance tax and Rs. 48,32,321 which was according to the assessing authority, the amount of tax payable by the assessee on regular assessment without giving credit for tax deducted at source. THE Assessing Officer allowed interest only on this amount excluding the amount of Rs. 4,22,544 by holding that the tax determined on regular assessment is the amount of Rs. 48,32,321 which is the amount before giving credit to the tax deducted at source. 4. THE assessee being still aggrieved by this order, in so far as the interest was restricted on the sum of Rs. 4,67,679 which was the difference between the advance tax paid by the assessee and the amount of tax as was indicated to be payable on regular assessment and did not take into account the amount of tax deducted at source which amount totalled to a sum of Rs. 4,22,544 preferred appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 4,67,679 which was the difference between the advance tax paid by the assessee and the amount of tax as was indicated to be payable on regular assessment and did not take into account the amount of tax deducted at source which amount totalled to a sum of Rs. 4,22,544 preferred appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). THE assessee took the stand that the tax deducted at source is an amount which had been paid to the credit of the Department and from out of the income of the assessee even at an earlier stage before the amount of tax was determined and the assessee was called upon to pay that amount and inasmuch as the advance tax payable by an assessee is the amount which he is required to estimate only after taking into account the tax deducted at source, the Assessing Officer ought to have given credit to the amount of tax deducted at source on account of the amount payable to the assessee and ought to have deducted this amount even before computing the tax determined on regular assessment which the assessee was called upon to pay and was required to pay. It was the stand of the assessee that if such amount of tax deducted at source had been given credit to, then, the amount of tax payable by the assessee on regular assessment itself would have come down and so the difference between the advance tax amount paid by the assessee and the tax determined on regular assessment would have been not merely Rs. 4,67,679 as had been found by the Assessing Officer, but Rs. 4,67,679 + Rs. 4,22,544. THE contention urged on behalf of the assessee found favour with the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee and held that the assessee was entitled to interest under Section 214 in respect of the difference of the two figures, namely, Rs. 53,00,000--Rs. 44,09,777, i.e., Rs. 8,90,223, as we have indicated above. The Revenue, being aggrieved by this order, further appealed to the Appellate Tribunal. 53,00,000--Rs. 44,09,777, i.e., Rs. 8,90,223, as we have indicated above. The Revenue, being aggrieved by this order, further appealed to the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal, by order dated February 6, 1996, dismissed the appeals holding that the assessee was entitled to interest on excess of advance tax paid after giving credit for tax deducted at source and indicated that in the exercise of determination of excess advance tax, the Assessing Officer should have taken note of the tax deducted at source and should have given credit to that amount even before calling upon the assessee to pay the tax determined on regular assessment and accordingly, the decision of the Appellate Commissioner was upheld by placing reliance on the view taken by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Addl. CIT v. Bareilly Corporation Bank Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 449. 5. THE Revenue, being aggrieved by this order of the Appellate Tribunal, have sought for our opinion on the question extracted above. 6. WE have heard learned counsel for the Revenue and learned counsel for the assessee. Sri Seshachala, learned standing counsel for the Department, has drawn our attention to the provisions of Section 214 and has specifically pointed out that the amount of interest due to an assessee on the excess amount that is required to be refunded, if the advance tax paid is in excess of the tax amount due by the assessee is governed by the statute and the interest to be allowed may be granted only in accordance with the provisions of Section 214 and not based on any other provision. It is the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue that interest cannot be allowed on any equitable grounds unless the statute itself provides so. Learned counsel has further submitted that tax deducted at source under the provisions of Section 194A of the Act does not form part of the amount of advance tax under the provisions of Sections 207 to 213 and inasmuch as Section 214 specifically mentions for paying interest only in respect of such amount of advance tax which was found to be in excess of the tax determined and as had been paid as per the provisions of Sections 207 to 213, and not on an amount which had been deducted by way of deduction at source under the provisions of Section 194A. Learned counsel in support of his submission has also placed reliance on the very decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Addl. CIT v. Bareilly Corporation Bank Ltd. [1978] 115 1TR 449 and drawn our attention to the third question which is as under (page 451) : "3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the assessee was not entitled to any further interest under Section 214 for the assessment year 1970-71 on excess tax deducted at source in addition to the interest payable on the advance tax of Rs. 46,500 ?" The learned judges of the Allahabad High Court had answered this question in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue and accordingly, learned counsel for the Revenue submits that the question that has been posed for our answer is also required to be answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Learned counsel has also drawn our attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in Modi Industries Ltd. v. CIT, particularly the discussions occurring at pages 781, 790 and 800. The ratio which learned counsel relies upon as emerges in the discussion of the apex court in these paragraphs is that interest provided for under the provisions of Section 214 is a statutory one and that can be allowed only strictly in conformity with the provisions of Section 214. Learned counsel points out that in so far as the present assessment is concerned, the concept of assessed tax which had been introduced by way of amendment and which has come into effect from April 1, 1985, was not available to the Assessing Officer or for the assessee to rely upon to claim interest on an amount which is found to be in excess of advance tax which was not part of advance tax paid as per the scheme under the provisions of Sections 207 and 213 and in the instant case there being no dispute that the tax deducted at source being specifically under the provisions of Section 194A, no interest could have been allowed by the Assessing Officer nor by the higher authorities. However, per contra, Sri Krishna Murthy, learned counsel, appearing for the assessee, has drawn our attention to some of the circulars which had been issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, incorporating certain opinion given by the Ministry of Law and Justice indicating that in so far as the mechanism of determination of tax on regular assessment is concerned, it is only fair and proper that even before such amount is determined, and the tax deducted at source which was deducted from out of the amounts payable to the assessee should have been taken note of. 7. THOUGH we have considered the submissions made on behalf of the Revenue by its learned counsel, and learned counsel is well supported in his submissions by the authorities, referred to above, on a detailed examination of the orders passed by the lower authorities, which has led to this reference, we are of the view that the question as posed by the Tribunal for our answer is not determinative of the real disputed issue. It is also clear that in the instant case, the provisions of Section 214 as it occurs after the incorporation of the words "assessed tax" by way of amendment by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act which has come into effect from April 1, 1985, is not of any significance or make any difference. The entitlement of the assessee for interest on the refund amount is not dependent on the provisions of law as it stands subsequent to the amendment incorporating the words "assessed tax". We have noticed that the entitlement of interest on the amount of refund has been allowed by the Appellate Commissioner and confirmed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, by a process of interpretation of the words "tax determined on regular assessment" occurring under Section 214 as it prevailed prior to the amendment which has been made effective from April 1, 1985. Section 214 at the relevant time read as : "214. Interest payable by Government. --(1) The Central Government shall pay simple interest at nine per cent. Section 214 at the relevant time read as : "214. Interest payable by Government. --(1) The Central Government shall pay simple interest at nine per cent. per annum on the amount by which the aggregate sum of any instalments of advance tax paid during any financial year in which they are payable under Sections 207 to 213 exceeds the amount of the tax determined on regular assessment, from the 1st day of April next following the said financial year to the date of the regular assessment for the assessment year immediately following the said financial year, and where any such instalment is paid after the expiry of the financial year during which it is payable by reason of the provisions of Section 213, interest as aforesaid shall also be payable on that instalment from the date of its payment to the date of the regular assessment : Provided that in respect of any amount refunded on a provisional assessment under Section 141A, no interest shall be paid for any period after the date of such provisional assessment. (1A) Where on completion of the regular assessment the amount on which interest was paid under Sub-section (1) has been reduced, the interest shall be reduced accordingly and the excess, if any, paid shall be deemed to be tax payable by the assessee and the provisions of this Act shall apply accordingly. (2) On any portion of such amount which is refunded under this Chapter, interest shall be payable only up to the date on which the refund was made." 8. THE interest allowed on the amount of refund is not either based on any interpretation involving Section 214 as it exists subsequent to this amendment nor in violation of any statutory provisions as is sought to be contended by learned counsel for the Revenue. It is not in dispute in the instant case that the amount of Rs. 53,00,000 which had been paid as advance tax is in consonance and as per the provisions of Sections 207 to 214 of the Act. It is also the case of the assessee that in so far as the amount of tax determined on regular assessment is concerned, and which is required to be called upon to be paid by the assessee on regular assessment, that amount can only be the amount of tax payable after giving credit to the tax deducted at source. It is also the case of the assessee that in so far as the amount of tax determined on regular assessment is concerned, and which is required to be called upon to be paid by the assessee on regular assessment, that amount can only be the amount of tax payable after giving credit to the tax deducted at source. We are of the opinion that learned counsel for the assessee is well founded in his submission, when once a certain amount has been deducted from out of the income of the assessee and credited to the account of the Department, and which amount can as a matter of right be taken credit for the ultimate tax payable by the assessee, that amount should be adjusted at some stage or the other and the stage of assessment is the appropriate stage when it can be so adjusted and only the balance amount called upon the assessee to be paid as the tax due to the Department. One other aspect is that even in the assessment of advance tax payable by the assessee, it is indicated that such assessment is to be done only after taking into account the tax already deducted at source and it is only the balance of amount that the assessee will be required to pay as advance tax. If that is so, the amount of tax deducted at source should be necessarily given credit to the assessee in the mechanism of determination of tax payable on regular assessment and that is what has been done by the Appellate Commissioner and the Tribunal. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that while the view taken in the orders passed by the Appellate Commissioner and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, is correct and sustainable, we are also of the view that the question posed for our opinion in the present reference is not one really arising for our consideration for determination as a question arising out of the facts and circumstances of this case. In a reference under Section 256, the High Court is required to answer only such questions of law which arise in the course of the order passed by the Tribunal and as a question which has formed the basis for decision by the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case. In a reference under Section 256, the High Court is required to answer only such questions of law which arise in the course of the order passed by the Tribunal and as a question which has formed the basis for decision by the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case. If a question which is referred for the opinion of the High Court does not really arise out of the facts and circumstances of the case decided by the Tribunal, answering such a question becomes a mere academic exercise inasmuch as the Tribunal will not be in a position to bring the order passed earlier by it in conformity with such opinion of the High Court as the opinion expressed by the High Court will be on an academic question of law not arising or applicable to the case on hand. But when once the High Court answers the reference, the Tribunal is bound to modify its earlier decision to bring it in conformity with the opinion expressed by the High Court. We are not inclined to put the Tribunal to this predicament by answering a question which really does not arise from out of the facts and circumstances of the case in respect of which the Tribunal has rendered its decision. Accordingly, we decline to answer the reference and return the reference made to us without answering. The assessee and the Department to bear their respective costs.