JUDGMENT JUDGMENT judgment of court was delivered by G. G. SOHANI J.-By reference under section 256(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as " Act "), Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, has referred following question of law to this court for its opinion: " Whether, on facts and in circumstances of case, Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had any jurisdiction to impose penalty under section 27 l(1)(c) on March 23, 1977, after sub-section (2) of section 274 was deleted with effect from April 1, 1976, by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975? " When reference came up for hearing before Division Bench of this court, court by its order dated September 17, 1980, directed Tribunal to send supplementary statement of case and specify date on which matter regarding imposition of penalty was referred by Income-tax Officer to Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. In pursuance of that direction, Tribunal has now sent supplementary statement of case. Tribunal has found that case for levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of Act was referred by Income-tax Officer, " E " Ward, Circle-I, Indore, to Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Range-I, Indore, for further proceedings, vide his memo dated September 11, 1975. In view of facts stated in supplementary statement of case, it must be held, following Division Bench decision of this court in CIT v. A. N. Tiwari [1980] 124 ITR 680, that as reference was made to Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 274(2) of Act in accordance with provisions of that section, as it stood at time of making reference, reference would not be invalidated by subsequent amendment deleting section 274(2) from April 1, 1976. Shri Choudhary, learned counsel for assessee, contended that there was no material on record to show whether matter which was referred by Income-tax Officer to Inspecting Assistant Commissioner fulfilled requirement of valid reference under section 274(2) of Act. Now, it is not disputed that Act or Rules framed under Act do not prescribe any form in which reference is required to be made under section 274(2) of Act. answer to question as to which was date when reference was made, will depend upon ascertainment of fact when Income-tax Officer, who had jurisdiction, had moved Inspecting Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction to initiate proceedings against assessee for imposition of penalty under section 274(2) of Act. As Income-tax Officer in instant case had referred to Inspecting Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction question of imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of Act on September II, 1975, it must be held that valid reference was made by Incometax Officer to Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 274(2) of Act prior to April 1, 1976. In this view of matter, Tribunal, in our opinion, was justified in law in holding that Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to impose penalty under section 271(1)(c) of Act on assessee. Our answer to question referred to this court is, therefore, in affirmative and against assessee. In circumstances of case, parties shall bear their own costs of this reference. *** PORWAL UDYOG (INDIA) v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX