Sohani, J.: is application under s. 256(2) of IT, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). material facts giving rise to this case, briefly, are as follows: assessee is individual and assessment year in question is 1978-79. assessee had deposited certain amount with firm Ratilal Manekji. case of assessee was that interest income did not accrue in relevant year of account as assessee had agreed to waive interest. contention of assessee was not upheld by ITO. ITO was of view that interest income amounting to Rs. 35,677 had accrued to assessee during relevant accounting year and same was assessed accordingly. appeal preferred before AAC was dismissed. assessee thereupon filed Second Appeal before Tribunal. Tribunal found, after consideration of entire material on record, that agreement entered into by assessee with firm not to charge interest was genuine and reasonable and that assessee had waived her right to claim interest. Tribunal held that on basis of evidence on record, it was fully established that interest income had not accrued to assessee in year of account. In this view of matter, Tribunal allowed appeal. application by Department to make reference was rejected by Tribunal. Hence, Department has filed this application. Having heard ld. counsel for parties, we have come to conclusion that this application deserves to be rejected. question as to whether interest income amounting to Rs. 35,677 had or had not accrued to assessee in relevant year of account is question of fact. Tribunal has found on consideration of material on record, that aforesaid income had not accrued to assessee in relevant year of account. This is finding of fact. No question of law arises out of order passed by Tribunal. application, discuses to be rejected. For all these reasons this application fails and is according by rejected. *** Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gunwantibai Ratilal