JUDGMENT judgment of court was delivered by S. P. Deshmukh J.-The appellant purports to pose question of law referred to hereinbelow: "Whether, on facts and in circumstances of case and in law, Tribunal was right in holding that interest under section 220(2) will be legally leviable from date of default in payment of demand by assessee till date of admission of application by assessee by Settlement Commission under section 245D(1) and not till final order of Settlement Commission under section 245D(4)?" relevant facts can be briefly narrated as under: case of respondent-assessee was taken up for assessment within framework of section 158BD of Income-tax Act, 1961. assessment was made on January 30, 2002, determining undisclosed income at Rs. 1,40,02,500. In course of said proceeding, assessee had filed application before Settlement Commission on May 11, 2001. application was admitted by Settlement Commission under section 245D(1) on September 16, 2002. Final order was passed by Settlement Commission on September 30, 2002, disposing of application. undisclosed income under same decreased to Rs. 32,20,000. assessee had paid demand within 30 days. On December 14, 2005, Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle XVIII, Mumbai, issued demand purporting to give effect to order under section 245D(4) charging and levying interest under section 220(2) of Income-tax Act, 1961, from date of assessment order-January 30, 2002, to September 30, 2005,-the date of order passed by Settlement Commission. As such matter before Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XVIII, Mumbai, ensued at instance of assessee. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) concurred with submissions on behalf of assessee that order of Assessing Officer does not survive after application under section 254D(1) is admitted. Commissioner further held that Assessing Officer was not justified in levying interest under section 220(2) from date of his assessment order to date of final order passed by Settlement Commission, in view of decision of hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT v. Damani Brothers [2003] 259 ITR 475 (SC). Consequently, he allowed appeal. Revenue against aforesaid order dated July 5, 2006, passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) XVIII, Mumbai, was in appeal before Appellate Tribunal purporting to dispute order passed by Commissioner (Appeals). Tribunal on perusal of record and on elaborate consideration of matter, taking into account relevant provisions of Income-tax Act, particularly provisions of section 220 and section 245D and legal position as emerging from decision referred to above, namely, CIT v. Damani Brothers [2003] 259 ITR 475 (SC), held that interest under section 220(2) would be legally leviable from date of demand raised in assessment before admission of application for settlement under section 245D(1). However, if demand stands reduced under order of Settlement Commission, interest would undergo revision correspondingly. Accordingly under its order dated March 26, 2009, Tribunal purported to correct order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and considered that it would not be proper to say that order of Assessing Officer would not survive after application under section 245D(1) is decided to be proceeded with, observing thus: "It was, accordingly, held that income-tax authorities were free to proceed in prescribed manner till Commission decided to proceed with application under section 245D(1). assessment order passed by Assessing Officer prior to admission of application for settlement will subsist and recovery proceedings will continue. hon'ble Supreme Court further observed that assessment did not get automatically set aside on admission of application for settlement." present appeal is against said order proposing to pose question referred to hereinabove. As can be seen, dates which have been referred to hereinabove, viz., date of assessment order, date of making application before Settlement Commission as well as date on which order passed by Settlement Commission are not in dispute. position as far as charging interest under section 220(2) is concerned is no longer res integra. It has been made clear under decision in case of Damani Brothers (supra) as also in decision of hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Brij Lal v. CIT reported in [2010] 328 ITR 477 (SC) which is case relating to levy of interest under section 234B of Income-tax Act, 1961, relied upon by assessee, observing (page 503): "As stated, till Settlement Commission decides to admit case under section 245D(1) proceedings under normal provisions remain open. But once Commission admits case after being satisfied that disclosure is full and true then proceedings commence with Settlement Commission. In meantime, applicant has to pay additional amount of tax with interest without which application for settlement would not be maintainable. Thus, interest under section 234B would be payable up to stage of section 245D(1)." position that interest can be charged pursuant to proceedings in normal course up to date of decision under section 245D(1) of Income- tax Act to proceed with application appears to be prevailing. In view of aforesaid, no decision from this court is required in respect of question of law sought to be raised. case is covered by decisions referred to hereinabove of hon'ble Supreme Court. As such question as sought to be raised stands decided accordingly. Thus, appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. *** Commissioner of Income-tax v. Smt. Leonie M. Almeida