Judgment :- R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J. Having heard counsel for the Revenue and perused the order of the Tribunal, we are not satisfied that any question (The questions were as follows : (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and had valid materials in holding that the assessee was entitled for benefits under the Amnesty Scheme ? (2) Having regard to the specific clarification given in the circulars explaining the availability of the Amnesty Scheme that immunity cannot be availed of by the assessee whose premises have been searched by the tax authorities (answer for question No. 12, 1995 (211) ITR 567 and 867) whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to the benefits of the Amnesty Scheme and accordingly in allowing the assessee's appeal ?) of law requiring our consideration does arise from the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has held that there had been a full disclosure by the assessee in the returns, and the fact that there was a revision of valuation after a search which did not yield any undisclosed assets would not disentitle the assessee from having the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme. All that the relevant statutory provisions require is a full and complete disclosure, and that the disclosure being voluntary. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has held that the disclosure was indeed voluntary. The tax case petitions are, therefore, dismissed.