1981 (7) TMI 105

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....; Rs. Rs. 1. 1968-69 3,220 990 2. 1969-70 10,868 3,718 3. 1970-71 9,516 129 4. 1971-72 3,761 202 5. 1972-73 10,382 1,759 However, as a result of the assessment of the firm in which the assessee was a partner and set off of the share of losses, the income of the assessee ultimately worked out a nil figure. The ITO, however, held that the assessee was not entitled for any refund because there was neither any provision for setting off the losses against the income disclosed under that Ordinance nor for refund of taxes paid thereunder. 2. The assessee went up in appeal to the AAC and the main contention raised on its behalf was that there was no restriction against grant of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... pursuance of a declaration made under sub-s. (1) of s. 3 shall not be refundable under any circumstances. Obviously, the intention of the framers of the Act could not be that s. 10 would apply to disclosures made under any of the provisions of the Act, even though they were in accordance with the provisions found in the later sections. Now it is the case of the Department itself that a declaration regarding the income can also be made under sub-s. (1) of s. 14 of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income & Wealth Act. Such a contingency would arise where any books of account, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles or things had been seized as a result of search u/s 132 of the IT Act or s. 37A of the WT Act. This provision....