Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2020 (2) TMI 859

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... would be caused to respondent Nos.1 and 2. The judgment relied on by the Court below in RAJU SEBASTIAN, SUNIL KUMAR P.S., ANIYAN ABRAHAM VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, THE TERRITORY MANAGER (RETAIL) [ 2019 (9) TMI 673 - KERALA HIGH COURT] cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case under the pretext of infringement of privacy effecting Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as the issue involved in the present case is whether respondent No.2 had the financial capacity to purchase the suit property. Therefore, to decide the said issue, it is essential to produce income tax returns and bank statement of account of respondent No.2 before the Court below. If the same are produced before the Co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 372 of 2019 to direct respondent No.3 to furnish certified copies of income tax returns of respondent No.2 for the period from 2006 to 2011 and I.A.No.373 of 2019 to direct respondent No.3 to furnish certified copy of statement of account of respondent No.2 being maintained with the State Bank of India for the period from 01.04.2011 to 31.03.2015. 3. The Court below, by relying on a division Bench of High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in case of Raju Sebastian and Others Vs. Union of India and Others in W.A.No.2112 of 2018, dated 04.09.2019, dismissed the said IAs by common order dated 19.09.2019, stating that the petitioner company is not entitled to seek production of documents pertaining to respondent No.2. Challenging the same, the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ashibhushan, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2, submits that there is no specific pleading in the plaint about the documents which are sought to be produced before the Court below and hence, the petitioner company cannot seek to produce the same later. He further submits that any information which discloses remittances made to the Income Tax Department towards discharge of tax liability would constitute personal information and that a demand for furnishing income tax returns would constitute invasion of the privacy of a person and hence, the Court below rightly dismissed the IAs and prays to dismiss the Civil Revision Petitions. 6. As per the evidence of respondent No.2, he worked in BSNL and retired. In the evidence of respond .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt of privacy effecting Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as the issue involved in the present case is whether respondent No.2 had the financial capacity to purchase the suit property. Therefore, to decide the said issue, it is essential to produce income tax returns and bank statement of account of respondent No.2 before the Court below. If the same are produced before the Court below, the same does not result in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as they are Government documents and are accessible to others. 9. In Pentakota Surya Appa Rao s case (supra), a division Bench of this Court held that income tax returns are public documents and they can be summoned by the Court. In view of the above, the order of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates