Confidential income-tax records cannot be certified for evidence at the request of a stranger without a right of inspection.

Certified copies of income-tax returns, assessment orders and related departmental records were unavailable to a person other than the assessee because the right to obtain a certified copy under the Evidence Act depended on a pre-existing right of inspection. Section 54(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 rendered such records confidential as between the assessee and the Department and barred disclosure except as authorised by that Act. An assessee could waive the protection and rely on his own return, but a stranger could not compel indirect disclosure through certified copies. Authorities allowing admissibility were distinguished as cases where the maker or an entitled person sought production.

---

---

Issues: Whether certified copies of income-tax returns, assessment orders and related departmental records could be produced in evidence by a person other than the assessee, and whether such copies could be treated as admissible certified copies under the Evidence Act despite the confidentiality created by the Income-tax Act.

Analysis: The documents were treated as public documents, but the controlling question was whether the applicant had a right to inspect them so as to obtain certified copies under the Evidence Act. The confidentiality provision in section 54(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 made the returns, statements, accounts and assessment records confidential as between the assessee and the Department, and barred disclosure by public servants except as permitted by the Act. The right under section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was held to depend on a pre-existing right to inspect the document; a person without such right could not obtain a lawful certified copy. An assessee may waive the statutory advantage and use his own return, but a stranger or other non-assessee cannot compel disclosure indirectly through certified copies. The authorities supporting admissibility were distinguished as cases where the maker of the return or a person otherwise entitled to inspection was producing the material.

Conclusion: A person other than the assessee had no right to inspect the confidential income-tax records or to obtain certified copies for evidence, and the documents were inadmissible at the instance of the petitioner.

---