Assessee was carrying on business of purchase and sale of land and trading in textile items of art silk clothes. During course of survey operation under S.  133A, variousloose documents were found by department.  Department filed a report before Settlement Commission submitting that quantum of additional income i.e. Rs. 22.09 Crore initially disclosed by assessee before Commission was not true and full disclosure.  During course of hearing before Commission, assessee disclosed further additional income under section 245D(4) aggregating to Rs. 12 crore for five assessment years i.e. 2012-13 to 2016-17, so as to put an end to controversy and in spirit of settlement before Commission.  Commission accepted disclosure made by assessee and held that all issues raised by petitioner were covered in said disclosed additional income.  Accordingly, case of assessee was settled on terms and conditions stated in order passed by Commission. Revenue filed the writ petition challenging  the  order of the Settlement Commission. Dismissing the petition the Court held that,  merely because assesseee had disclosed further additional income during course of settlement, it could not be said that Commission did not follow procedure prescribed under Act. According the  Commission was right in considering said revised offer made by assessee. (AY. 2012-13 to  2016-17)