1965 (3) TMI 61

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ased on documents or accounts which had been seized illegally, they are invalid. The contention is that, since this Court has held sub-sections (2) to (4) of section 41 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act to be unconstitutional or not competent, search and seizure of the documents were illegal and that documents and account books so obtained cannot legally be used in support of the assessments. I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... seized under provisions of law which do not confer the power to do so or which the Court has declared to be in excess of legislative power or ultra vires. The proposition seems to receive support from Kuruma v. The Queen[1955] A.C. 197., the ratio of which is that irrespective of the means or the manner by which evidence is secured, its admissibility is dependent on the question of relevancy and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... there appears to be considerable difference of opinion among the Judges both in the State and Federal Courts as to whether or not the rejection of evidence obtained by illegal means depends on certain articles in the American Constitution." Suffice it to say that we have no provision in the Indian Constitution corresponding to the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. In fact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X