Judgment N.K.Sud, J. 1. The revenue has filed this petition under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking a direction to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) to refer the following question of law for the opinion of this court : "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in cancelling interest charged under section 139(8) and under section 217 at the time of framing assessment under sections 143(3) and 147 by holding that Explanation 2 to section 139(8) is not applicable ?" 2. The case pertains to the assessment year 1985-86. The assessee had filed its return of income on 12-2-1986. The assessment was completed under section 143(1) of the Act on 27-2-1986. Thereafter the proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated and in response to the notice under section 148, return was filed on 21-12-1988, and the reassessment was completed on 30-11-1990. In the reassessment interest under sections 139(8) and 217 of the Act was levied. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) which was allowed vide order, dated 16-10-1991, and the interest levied under sections 139(8) and 217 was cancelled. The revenue filed an appeal before the Tribunal which was dismissed on 10-7-1998. The Tribunal held that the interest under sections 139(8) and 217 of the Act could not be levied vide order, dated 30-11-1990, as it was not a regular assessment. 3. The term regular assessment has been defined in section 2(40) of the Act to mean an assessment made under section 143(3) or section 144 of the Act. This provision had come up for consideration before the Supreme Court in Modi Industries Ltd. V/s. CIT & Anr. (1995) 216 ITR 759 (SC) in which it was held that there is nothing in the Act to suggest that "regular assessment" has been used in any other sense than the first assessment made under section 143 or section 144. Any modified or revised assessment after completion of the order under section 143 or section 144 will be a fresh order. However, vide the Taxation Law (Amendment) Act, 1984, Explanation 2 to section 139(8) of the Act was inserted with effect from 1-4-1985. Any modified or revised assessment after completion of the order under section 143 or section 144 will be a fresh order. However, vide the Taxation Law (Amendment) Act, 1984, Explanation 2 to section 139(8) of the Act was inserted with effect from 1-4-1985. This Explanation reads as under : "Where, in relation to an assessment, or (b) not withstanding that there has been no omission or failure as mentioned in clause (a) on the part of the assessee, the assessing officer has in consequence of information in his possession reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year)." From the above, it is clear that section 147 cofers jurisdiction to make an assessment as also a reassessment. An assessment under this provision can be made for the first time in a case where no assessment had been made earlier despite there being income liable to tax. On the other hand, it also permits a reassessment to be made in a case where an assessment has already been made earlier, but some income is found to have escaped assessment, Explanation 2 to section 139(8) of the Act shows that it is only an assessment made for the first time under section 147 which can be regarded as a "regular assessment". It does not entail in its scope a reassessment made under this section. 4 In the present case, as per facts already noticed, it is apparent that the assessment made under section 147 of the Act on 30-11-1990 was not the first or the initial assessment. The initial assessment had been framed under section 143(1) of the Act on 27-2-1986. Thus even under the aforesaid Explanation the reassessment framed on 30-11-1990, under section 147 of the Act could not be regarded as a regular assessment. In view of this clear position in law, we find that no referable question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.