9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Admissibility of certified copies of Income-tax documents. 2. Confidentiality of Income-tax documents under Section 54 of the Income-tax Act. 3. Right to inspect and obtain certified copies under Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act. Detailed Analysis: Admissibility of Certified Copies of Income-tax Documents: The petitioner argued that the certified copies of the Income-tax documents are public documents and thus admissible under Section 65(e) of the Indian Evidence Act. The plaintiff-opposite party conceded that these documents are public documents. However, the court examined whether these certified copies were admissible in evidence given the confidentiality provisions under Section 54 of the Income-tax Act. Confidentiality of Income-tax Documents under Section 54 of the Income-tax Act: Section 54(1) of the Income-tax Act states that particulars contained in any statement, return, accounts, or documents produced under the Act are to be treated as confidential. The court noted that this confidentiality is intended to ensure that assessees can freely disclose information to the Income-tax Department without fear of it being used against them. The court held that allowing these documents to be put into evidence by anyone other than the assessee would defeat the purpose of Section 54. The court concluded that the documents in question are confidential and cannot be required to be produced by any public servant before a court, nor can such public servant be required to give evidence in respect thereof. Right to Inspect and Obtain Certified Copies under Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act: The petitioner contended that under Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, she had the right to obtain certified copies of the documents since she was interested in them. However, the court clarified that for Section 76 to apply, the person must have a right to inspect the document. Since the documents are confidential under Section 54 of the Income-tax Act, the petitioner, not being the maker or the assessee, had no right to inspect them. The court cited several precedents, including Anwar Ali v. Tafozal Ahmed and Promatha Nath v. Nirode Chandra, to support its conclusion that certified copies obtained by someone who does not have the right to inspect the original documents are not admissible in evidence. The court also addressed the petitioner's claim that she was a partner in the shop related to the documents. It was noted that according to her own case, her husband, not she, was the partner. Hence, she had no right to claim copies as a partner. Conclusion: The court dismissed the petition, holding that the certified copies of the Income-tax documents were inadmissible in evidence due to the confidentiality provisions of Section 54 of the Income-tax Act. The petitioner was not entitled to inspect or obtain certified copies of these documents under Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act. The application was dismissed with costs. Separate Judgments: V. Ramaswami, C.J., concurred with the judgment.
|
