Voluntary disclosure immunity denied where income was already discovered in search and the declaration lacked full and true disclosure.

A voluntary disclosure scheme granting immunity was held unavailable where the income declared had already come to the Department's knowledge through search proceedings and the declaration lacked full and true disclosure. The Supreme Court treated the firm and its partners as sufficiently connected for this purpose, and noted that a partner may represent the firm under the Partnership Act. Construing the scheme purposively, it rejected a technical plea that would defeat its object and treated concealment or misrepresentation as fatal to the statutory protection.

---

---

Issues: Whether the firm could claim immunity under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 in respect of income already unearthed in search proceedings concerning its partner and common business premises, and whether the declaration and certificate obtained under the scheme were liable to be treated as invalid.

Analysis: The scheme required a full and true disclosure, and its benefit was unavailable where the income declared had already come to the knowledge of the Department through search and seizure proceedings. The Court treated the firm and its partners as sufficiently connected for this purpose, noting that the declaration related to the same income and source that had been disclosed or discovered in the search. It further held that a partner represents the firm under the Partnership Act, and that the scheme should be construed purposively so that its object is not defeated by a technical plea. Since the declaration was found to involve concealment and misrepresentation, the statutory immunity could not be invoked.

Conclusion: The claim to benefit under the scheme was rejected and the challenge to the impugned orders failed.

Final Conclusion: The statutory disclosure scheme could not be used to secure immunity for income already discovered in search proceedings, especially where the declaration lacked full and true disclosure and was tainted by misrepresentation.

Ratio Decidendi: A voluntary disclosure scheme granting immunity must be construed purposively, and its protection is unavailable where the declarant has not made a full and true disclosure or where the disclosed income was already within the Department's knowledge through search proceedings.

---