9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1972 (7) TMI 30 - HC - Income TaxIncome-tax records - Confidential Nature - Whether income-tax records are confidential in nature and can be summoned to be produced in a court
Issues:
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to have assessment records produced in court through the Income-tax Officer? Analysis: The case involved a money suit where the petitioner stood surety for payment of a debt. The plaintiff, a registered money-lender, had initially claimed the debt but later amended his statement regarding discontinuation of money-lending business during the transaction period. The defendants contended that the suit was not valid under the Orissa Money-Lenders Act. During the trial, the petitioner filed applications to summon the Income-tax Officer for assessment records of the plaintiff. The court initially directed the petitioner to obtain certified copies but later rejected further requests. The petitioner argued that the assessment records were necessary for the case. The court examined the relevant statutory provisions under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and the Income-tax Act, 1961. It highlighted the confidentiality of information under these Acts and the restrictions on disclosure by public servants. The court noted the amendments in the 1961 Act, particularly section 138(1)(b), which empowered the Commissioner to disclose information in the public interest. The court emphasized that after the Finance Act, 1964, there was no general declaration of confidentiality for assessment documents, and courts were not barred from summoning such particulars. Consequently, the court held that section 138(1)(b) was an enabling provision, and courts retained the authority to summon the Income-tax Officer for documents not prohibited or privileged. The court concluded that the lower judge erred in refusing to summon the Income-tax Officer, as it was within the court's jurisdiction to request the assessment records. Therefore, the court allowed the application, set aside the lower judge's order, and directed the judge to handle the application in accordance with the law and observations provided. No costs were awarded in the circumstances.
|
