Voluntary disclosure certificate immunity bars covered income-tax proceedings when statutory eligibility is satisfied and the certificate remains valid.

A valid certificate issued under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 confers statutory immunity where the declarant satisfies the scheme conditions and the certificate is not shown to have been obtained on legally sustainable grounds of ineligibility or falsity of material particulars. On the facts noted, the declarant was eligible to file the disclosure because no notice under sections 142(1) or 148 had been issued and no action under sections 132(1) or 133A had been taken. The omission to mention seizure in the declaration did not defeat protection, and the department could not disregard the valid certificate or continue covered proceedings under sections 158BD and 158BC.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner, having obtained a certificate under section 68(2) of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997, was immune from proceedings under sections 158BD and 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and entitled to refund of the seized amount.

Analysis: The petitioner was found to be eligible to make a declaration under section 64 of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997, as no notice under sections 142(1) or 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 had been issued to him and no action under sections 132(1) or 133A had been taken against him. The certificate granted under section 68(2) was held to be valid and effective, and the omission to mention seizure in the declaration did not defeat the statutory protection where the department itself had admitted the absence of any warrant of authorisation against the petitioner. The Court applied the principle that once a valid statutory certificate is issued under a disclosure scheme, the proceedings covered by the scheme cannot be reopened or continued in disregard of the immunity conferred, and the certificate could not be cancelled by the department on the facts found.

Conclusion: The proceedings under sections 158BD and 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were quashed, and the petitioner was held entitled to refund of the seized amount with interest.

Final Conclusion: A valid certificate under the disclosure scheme conferred immunity against the impugned block assessment proceedings, and the seizure could not be retained against the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Once a declarant satisfies the conditions of a voluntary disclosure scheme and obtains a valid statutory certificate, the revenue cannot continue or reopen covered proceedings unless the certificate is shown to have been obtained on legally sustainable grounds of ineligibility or falsity of material particulars.

---