TMI Blog1967 (8) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . JUDGMENT This revision proceeding involves a point of some interest, with regard to the precise effect of section 137(1) and (2) of the Income-tax Act (43 of 1961), in relation to interrogatories served on a party to a suit under Order XI, Civil Procedure Code. The facts are not in dispute, that the interrogatories included one question whether the respondent to the present proceedings had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether he had shown a particular asset or income in his income-tax return for a particular year, or otherwise. The privilege is sought to be based upon section 137(1) and (2) of the Income-tax Act (43 of 1961), and on certain observations of Mockett J. in Velayudham Pillai v. Subramania Pillai. When this matter is examined carefully, it will at once be seen that the claim of privilege on behal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sset or income in his income-tax return, or inhibiting a party from replying to such a question. The Bench of Veeraswami J. and Krishnaswamy Reddy J. observed in Sivagami Achi v. Ramanathan Chettiar that section 137 did not create an obligation, privilege or right. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner brings it to my notice that in the latest Income-tax Act, section 137 is altogether om ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... desires to refute the reply by producing the original document, the question whether the revision petitioner can thus attempt to procure the original return from the department, is a different matter altogether. That will concern the obligations and rights of the income-tax authorities and it will have to be dealt with on the provisions of the Income-tax Act as it stands. The order of the lower ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
