Amnesty circular and penalty immunity turn on prior detection of concealment, not merely on a later search.

Under the CBDT amnesty circular, immunity from penalty depends on whether concealment had already been detected in the search and whether disclosure was made before that detection; a later search by itself does not defeat immunity. The circular also does not prohibit initiation of penalty proceedings, and no separate right of appeal against mere initiation was shown. Where no penalty proceedings had been initiated for a year, the appeal was misconceived. For the other years, the claim for immunity was rejected and the orders sustaining that rejection were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to immunity from penalty under the CBDT amnesty circular where the return had been filed before the search, and whether initiation of penalty proceedings was barred.

Analysis: The circular was construed to mean that immunity depends not on the mere fact of a search or raid, but on whether the material revealing concealment had already been found in the course of the search. If disclosure was made before the search, immunity could not be denied merely because a raid later took place, though the scope of immunity would still depend on what was disclosed and what was found during the search. The circular contained no prohibition against initiation of penalty proceedings, and no separate right of appeal against such initiation was shown. For the year in which no penalty proceedings had been initiated, the appeal itself was misconceived. For the other years, the rejection of the claim for immunity was upheld, though for reasons different from those adopted below.

Conclusion: The assessee was not entitled to relief against initiation of penalty proceedings, and the orders rejecting the claim of immunity were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Under the amnesty circular, mere conduct of a search does not by itself bar initiation of penalty proceedings or deny immunity; the decisive factor is whether concealment was already found in the search and whether the disclosure was made before such detection.

---