TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (10) TMI 63
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was entitled to depreciation in respect of the building, Rambagh Palace ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the finding of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the declaration was legally made under section 3 of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975 ? (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the finding of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that in view of section 8(1) of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975, the amount of voluntarily disclosed i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee was held entitled to the depreciation in CIT V. Amber Corporation [1981] 127 ITR 29. Since both the questions are covered by the Division Bench decision of this court and thereafter even by the apex court in the case of S. V. Chandra Pandian v. S. V. Sivalinga Nadar [1993] 1 SCC 589, which held that, even on dissolution of the partnership and distribution of the residue amongst the partners after settlement of accounts in terms of section 48 of the Partnership Act, it is to be treated as distribution of movable property and does not result in partition, transfer or extinguishment of interest so as to attract 17 and it was not considered that the provisions of section 17(1) of the Registration Act, 1908, are applicable thereto. In this vi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uary 3, 1975, and, in the course of the search and seizure, certain papers relating to the assessee were found. The incriminating articles were seized in the course of the search and seizure operation. The Income-tax Officer was of the view that the declaration should be made only under section 14(1) and not under section 3. The contention which was raised was that the assessee-firm was dissolved on March 28, 1973, and then Messrs. Rambagh Palace (Hotel) Pvt. Ltd. came into existence. The search should have been carried out in the premises of the assessee-firm and since it was carried out in the premises of a limited company, the provisions of section 14(1) are not applicable. The Income-tax Officer found that the authorised officers seize....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Wealth Act, 1976, are not applicable. The appeal preferred before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal by the Revenue was dismissed. We have considered the argument of both learned counsel. The provisions of section 14(1) are as under : " 14. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, where any books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles or things belonging to a person have been seized as a result of a search, under section 132 of the Income-tax Act or section 37A of the Wealth-tax Act and such person (hereafter in this section referred to as 'the declarant') makes, on or after the date of commencement of this Act but before the 1st day of January, 1976, a declaration in accordance with sub-....