Judgment K. Raviraja Pandian, J. The appeal at the instance of the revenue is filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai D Bench, Chennai, dated 15.02.2005 passed in ITA No.4 (Mds.)/2002 relating to the assessment year 1998-99. 2. The assessment of the assessee company was completed under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act on 22.02.1999 on a total income of Rs.39,83,430/-. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) passed an order by reducing the total income to Rs.31,58,950/-. The Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 154 on 19.01.2000 since there was an omission to charge interest under Section 234B and 234C. In the rectification order under Section 154, interest under Sections 234B and 234C was levied and the MAT credit which is available in favour of the assessee was adjusted after the interest has been calculated. On appeal, the Commissioner of Tax (Appeals), after hearing the parties, directed the assessment officer to compute the interest taking into consideration the MAT credit for which assessee is entitled. The revenue filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal referring its own decision, confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Tax (Appeals). The correctness of the same is put in issue in this appeal by formulating the following question of law:- " Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that for purposes of computation of interest under Section 234B and 234C, tax credit under Section 115JAA has to be first set off against the tax payable and the interest under the said sections have to be computed after taking into consideration the tax credit carried forward under Section 115JAA even though there is no legal sanction for such adjustment under Sections 208 to 211, under Sections 234B or 234C or under any other provisions of the Act ? 3. We heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the materials available on record. 4. The very same issue has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in which one of us was a party in T.C.A.Nos.887 of 2004 etc. 3. We heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the materials available on record. 4. The very same issue has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in which one of us was a party in T.C.A.Nos.887 of 2004 etc. batch on 09.04.2009 and held the question of law against the revenue in favour of the assessee to the effect that the interest under the said two provisions have to be calculated after giving effect to the MAT credit. The said judgment squarely covers the question of law framed in this appeal. Hence, as the question of law has already been decided by this Court against the revenue, the appeal deserves to be dismissed and accordingly, dismissed.