Madras H.C : There had been a full disclosure by the assessee in the returns, and the fact that there was a revision of valuation after a search which did not yield any undisclosed assets would not disentitled the assessee from having the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme.

High Court Of Madras

Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. T.N. Somasundaram Nadar

Section 256(2)

R. Jayasimha Babu & K. Gnanaprakasam, JJ.

Tax Case Petns. Nos. 174 to 191 of 1999

11th July, 2001

Counsel Appeared

Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, for the Petitioner

JUDGMENT

R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J. :

Having heard counsel for the Revenue and perused the order of the Tribunal, we are not satisfied that any question of law requiring our consideration does arise from the order of the Tribunal.

2. The Tribunal has held that there had been a full disclosure by the assessee in the returns, and the fact that there was a revision of valuation after a search which did not yield any undisclosed assets would not disentitled the assessee from having the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme.

All that the relevant statutory provisions require is a full and complete disclosure, and that the disclosure being voluntary. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has held that the disclosure was indeed voluntary. The tax case petitions are, therefore, dismissed.

[Citation : 254 ITR 293]