SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1973 Supreme(Ori) 241

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
R.N. Misra, J.
TARACHAND KOYAL - APPELLANT
Versus
MAHESWAR CHOUDHURY - RESPONDENT
Civil Revision No. 148 of 1973
Decided On : 11-05-1973

Advocates Appeared:
R.C. Misra and A.K. Tripathy, for the Appellant; R.N. Sinha and S.N. Sinha, for the Respondent

Section 6(c) of the General Clauses Act applies to the omission of Section 137 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the protection available under Section 54 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, or Section 137 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, would still be available in regard to documents produced for the assessment years relating to the period previous to the repeal.

Headnote:

INCOME TAX - Production of documents - Bar against disclosure - Whether Section 6(c) of the General Clauses Act applies to the omission of Section 137 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Whether the protection available under Section 54 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 or Section 137 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 would still be available in regard to documents produced for the assessment years relating to the period previous to the repeal.

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff-opposite party sued for recovery of arrears of rent and other ancillary reliefs against the defendant-petitioner. In the suit, an application was made to call for the assessment records, including the trading account, profit and loss statements, balance-sheets, etc., of the defendant from the Income Tax Officer for the assessment years 1954-55 to 1964-65 and for certain reports relating to registration records of the defendant and some other concerns. The defendant objected to the prayer for production of accounts on the ground that both under the Income Tax Act and the Orissa Sales Tax Act, there is a bar against the disclosure of information and as such the court was not competent to issue orders calling for the records.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the provisions of Section 54 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, and the provisions of Section 137 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were applicable to the documents called for relating to the assessment years 1954-55 to 1964-65. In view of the bar provided in the respective provisions of the statutes, the impugned order could not have been made.

Issues: Whether Section 6(c) of the General Clauses Act applies to the omission of Section 137 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 6(c) of the General Clauses Act applies to the omission of Section 137 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court reasoned that there was no intention manifested by the repealing provision or even the amendment brought to Section 138 of the Act would not disclose a contrary intention. Therefore, Section 6(c) of the General Clauses Act is attracted to the situation.

Final Decision: The court allowed the civil revision, set aside the direction of the learned trial judge regarding summoning of documents from the Income Tax Officer, but made no order as to costs.

JUDGMENT :

R.N. Misra, J. - The plaintiff-opposite party has sued for recovery of arrears of rent and other ancillary relief's against the defendant-petitioner. In the suit an application was made to call for the assessment-records including the trading account, profit and loss statements, balance-sheets, etc., of the defendant from the Income Tax Officer for the assessment years 1954-55 to 1964-65 and for certain reports relating to registration records of the defendant and some other concerns. The defendant objected to the prayer for production of accounts on the ground that both under the Income Tax Act as also under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, there is a bar against the disclosure of information and as such the court was not competent to issue orders calling for the records.

2. The learned trial judge has rejected the application so far as the sales tax documents are concerned. That matter has become final since the plaintiff has not moved against that order. The learned trial judge has, however, allowed the prayer of the plaintiff in relation to the Income Tax documents. The defendant has, therefore, come in revision before this court and asks that direction to be quashed as it is contrary to law and no jurisdiction vests in the learned trial judge to make the impugned order in view of the provisions of the Income Tax Act.

3. u/s 54 of the Income Tax Act of 1922, the prohibition against disclosure of information was provided thus:

"(1) All particulars contained in any statement made, return furnished or accounts or documents produced under the provisions of this Act, or in any evidence given, or affidavit or deposition made, in the course of any proceedings under this Act other than proceedings under this Chapter, or in any record of any assessment proceeding, or any proceeding relating to the recovery of a demand, prepared for the purposes of this Act, shall be treated as confidential, and notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1) 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, documents or record or any part of any such record or to give evidence before it in respect thereof."

4. Sub-section (2) made disclosure criminally punishable and Sub-section (3) provided certain exceptions. The corresponding provision in the 1961 Act was to be found in Section 137(1), This section was omitted from the statute by the Finance Act of 1964 with effect from April 1, 1964.

5. Under the 1961 Act, disclosure of information respecting assesses was provided for in Section 138 in the following terms :

" (I) Where a person makes an application to the Commissioner in the prescribed form for any information relating to any assessee in respect of any assessment made either under this Act or the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, on or after the 1st day of April, I960, the Commissioner may, if he is satisfied that it is in the public interest so to do, furnish or cause to be furnished the information asked for in respect of that assessment only and his decision in this behalf shall be final and shall not be called in question in any court of law.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1) or any other law for the time being in force, the Central Government may, having regard to the practices and usages customary or any other relevant factors, by order notified in the Official Gazette, direct that no information or documents shall be furnished or produced by a public servant in respect of such matters relating to such class of assesses or except to such authorities as may be specified in the order "

6. This section after amendment by Finance Act of 1964 reads thus :

"138(1)(a) The Board or any other Income Tax authority specified by it by a general or special order in this behalf may furnish or cause to be furnished to,--

(i) any officer, authority or body performing any functions under any law relating to the imposition of






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top