Confidentiality of income-tax records prevents unilateral access by one heir absent a joint right of inspection.

Confidentiality of income-tax records remains personal to the assessee and, after death, cannot be claimed unilaterally by one heir when several legal representatives exist. The estate must be represented jointly, and one rival heir cannot assume the deceased's position to obtain certified copies of returns or assessment records. Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act also required a direct right of inspection, which was absent because the applicant's interest in partition or contribution was only collateral and speculative. Accordingly, no right to inspection or certified copies was established, and disclosure of the deceased assessee's records was refused.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether certified copies of income-tax returns and assessment records of a deceased assessee could be granted to one of several legal representatives when the estate was in dispute inter se the heirs; (ii) whether the applicant could claim inspection and certified copies under the rule of confidentiality in section 54 of the Indian Income-tax Act or under section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Issue (i): Whether certified copies of income-tax returns and assessment records of a deceased assessee could be granted to one of several legal representatives when the estate was in dispute inter se the heirs.

Analysis: The protection under section 54 of the Indian Income-tax Act is for the benefit of the assessee and, after his death, cannot be treated as a transferable or heritable privilege available to any one heir acting alone. Where there are several legal representatives, the estate is represented jointly and one heir cannot, by himself, assume the deceased's personality for the purpose of obtaining confidential tax records. Allowing unilateral access would also defeat the object of the confidentiality provision, especially where the dispute is only among the heirs and not between the estate and the revenue.

Conclusion: The request for certified copies by one legal representative alone was not maintainable and was against the applicant.

Issue (ii): Whether the applicant could claim inspection and certified copies under the rule of confidentiality in section 54 of the Indian Income-tax Act or under section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Analysis: Section 54 makes the tax records confidential and bars disclosure by the department, while section 76 allows a certified copy only to a person who has a right to inspect the document. The right to inspect public documents depends on a direct and tangible legal interest in the document itself, not merely on some collateral advantage in another proceeding. In the circumstances, the applicant had no such direct interest in the deceased's returns or assessment orders for the completed assessment years, and the returns filed by the widow in her own claim of proprietorship were likewise not open to inspection by the rival heir. The claimed interest in partition or contribution was only indirect and speculative.

Conclusion: No right to inspection or certified copies was established and the issue was against the applicant.

Final Conclusion: The department was bound to maintain confidentiality of the deceased assessee's records, and the rival heir could not compel disclosure or obtain copies in the absence of a joint entitlement or a direct right of inspection.

Ratio Decidendi: The privilege of confidentiality in income-tax records is personal to the assessee and, after death, can be exercised only by all legal representatives jointly where a right of inspection otherwise exists; a mere collateral interest in related civil disputes does not confer a right to inspect or obtain certified copies.

---