The exception provided in Sub-section (3)(m) of Section 54 of the Income-tax Act only applies to the appropriate authority seeking to establish whether a person has been assessed to income tax in a particular year, and does not extend to third parties.

C.P.Sinha, J.

1. This is an application against the order of the Court below holding that, under the provisions of Sec. 54 (1) of the Income-tax Act the papers, namely, the assessment orders and returns filed by the firm Jairamdas Sah Babulal, are confidential and, therefore, the Income-tax Officer should not be compelled to produce those papers in Court.

2. Mr. Chatterji has submitted that the Court below was wrong in construing Section 54 (3) (m) of the Income-tax Act, and that, if properly construed, it should have been held that the papers needed by the petitioner were papers which are covered by the exception, namely, the exception mentioned in Sub-clause (m) of Clause 3. He has further argued that, the Income-tax Officer having chosen to give certified copies of certain documents, it does not lie in his mouth to refuse certified copies of the documents in question.

3. To understand the argument of Mr. Chatterji, it is necessary to state a few facts. The plaintiff-petitioner is the widow of one Sriniwas Sah. She has brought a suit for a declaration that the partnership business carried on under the name and style of "Jairamdas Babulal" stood dissolved from the 3rd August, 1950, the date on which Sriniwas Sah, one of the partners of the firm, died, and for full accounts of the partnership business from the beginning up to date, and for some other reliefs. One of the defences was that the late Sriniwas Sah was not a partner of the firm "Jairamdas Babulal" at all and that he had no concern with the assets and profits of the said firm. It is stated that the firm Jairam Das Sah Babulal had filed returns of income in certain years, and that if certified copies of those returns were produced in Court, it would eslablish beyond doubt that the plaintiffs husband, namely, Sriniwas, was a partner of the firm and that would, therefore, disprove the allegation of the defendants that he was not. I must confess that, if unfettered by law, I may have directed certified copies of the returns aforesaid to be issued and the documents and the assessment orders concerned to be produced in Court because those documents, if correctly reported by the plaintiff, had established beyond doubt her case and disestablished the case of the defendants; but, in my opinion, the law is against it, and for very good reasons of public policy Sec. 54 of the Income-tax Act provides :

"All particulars contained in any statement made, return furnished or accounts or documents produced under the provisions of this Act...... shall be treated as confidential, and notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Evidence Act, 1372 (I of 1872), no Court shall, save as provided in this Act, be entitled to require any public servant to produce before it any such return, accounts, locumeuts, or record or any part of any such record or to give evidence before it in respect thereof."

(2) If a public servant discloses any particulars contained in any such statement, return, accounts, documents, evidence, affidavit......he shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to six months, and shall also be liable to fine.

(3) Nothing in this section shall apply to the disclosure -- * * * * *

(m) of so much of such particulars, to the appropriate authority, as may be necessary to establish whether a person has or has not been assessed to income-tax in any particular year or years. Where under the provisions of any law for the time being in force such fact is required to be established;....."

These are the relevant provisions of Sec. 54. Unless the case in hand is covered by the exception, namely, Sub-clause (m), the petitioner is not entitled to an order upon the Income-tax Department either for production or for issue of certified copies of the returns submitted by and the assessment orders, passed on, the firm Jairamdas Sah Babulal. As I said, the principle behind Sec. 54 is that all such documents, as are mentioned therein, filed or statements made before the I