The main legal point established is that S. 54, Income-tax Act protects only those accounts and entries in the books of account that were communicated by the assessee to the Income-tax Officer for the purpose of assessment.

ORDER :- According to the evidence given by this witness, there are certain books which have some into his possession, as the Income-tax Officer, he having received them from the Anti-corruption Branch, C.I.D., Bombay, as against his receipt dated 10th September 1949. Four books being items Nos. 2, 9, 14 and 15 in that receipt are sought to be called for from him as being relevant for the purpose of the inquiry before me. They are rough cash books of defendant 1, for several periods beginning with 5th November 1945, and ending with 17th July 1949. It is alleged by the plaintiff that there are in these books entries with regard to the receipt of rents of the Foras Road property crediting the same to defendant 1 himself even though according to the case as put forward here, the Foras Road property was sold by defendant 1 to defendant 3 by the document dated 15th May 1945. There is no doubt about the relevancy of the entries in these books. The only question that arises for my consideration is whether the witness, who is the Income-tax Officer concerned in. the assessment of defendant 1 and who is in possession, power or custody of these books, can be called upon to produce these books in Court by reason of the provisions of S. 54, Income-tax Act 1922.

2. A real controversy has ranged round this question. Mr. Peerbhoy for defendant 1 was frank enough to concede that so far as his client was concerned, he would, so far as it lay within his power, call upon the income-tax authorities be make these books available for the purpose of giving inspection of the relevant entries there from to the other side, under proper safeguards adopted in that behalf by the income-tax authorities. He had no objection to the disclosure of the relevant entries there from to the other side and inspection thereof by them. If, however, the matter was pressed to the production of these books in Court notwithstanding the provisions of S. 54, Income-tax Act, he urged that having regard to the two cases one of out High Court reported in Emperor v. Osman Chotani, ILR (1942) Bom 767 : (AIR (29) 1942 Bom 289 : 44 Cr. LJ 7), and the other of the Madras High Court reported in Mr. Rangaswami Naicker v. M. Biju Naicker, (1941) 9 ITR 693 : (AIR (29) 1948 Mad 276), the witness, as the Income-tax Officer, concerned with this assessment, could not be called upon to produce the same in Court. He particularly relied upon the judgment of Gentle, J. in the Madras case above referred to where the books of account of the partnership had been lodged with the Income-tax Officer and a partner of the partnership required the production of these books for the purpose of taking inspection thereof. Normally, each partner would be entitled to claim the partnership books as his own and he would be entitled as owner thereof to inspection of all the entries therein. The question, however, which arose before the Madras High Court was whether under the provisions of S. 54, Income-tax Act, the Income-tax Officer could be called upon to produce these books even for the purpose of inspection thereof being taken by a partner of the partnership. Gentle, J., before whom the matter came up in the High Court, observed that the terms of S. 54, Income-tax Act were mandatory in character and once the books of account were as such produced by the partnership before the Income-tax Officer, they came within the ban of S. 54, being accounts or documents produced before the Income-tax Officer under the provisions of the Act, and being such accounts or documents the Income-tax Officer was entitled to say that he was not bound to produce the same. Mr. M.V. Desai, for the plaintiff, on the other hand, urged before me relying upon the observations of Sir John Beaumont, C.J., at p. 772 in Osman Chotanis case : (ILR (1942) Bom 767 : AIR (29) 1942 Bom 289 : 44 Cr. LJ 7), that the object of the enactment of S. 51. Income-tax Act was to save confidential communications which the assessee may make to the I