Consular immunity does not block income-tax summons; attendance may be required before tax at the department's office.

Section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers enforcement of attendance and production of evidence for tax inquiry, and that power was held not to be defeated by a claim of diplomatic or consular immunity. The limited protection under section 8 of the Diplomatic Relations (Vienna Convention) Act, 1972 concerns entry into diplomatic premises for service of process and does not create a general exemption from complying with income-tax summons, especially where business and alleged consular activity are carried on from the same premises. As a practical arrangement, the person could appear before the Assessing Officer at the Assistant Commissioner's office, preserving the statutory inquiry.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a person claiming to be an honorary consul could resist summons issued under section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the ground of immunity attached to consular premises. (ii) Whether the petitioner could be directed to appear before the Assessing Officer at his office instead of at the consular premises.

Issue (i): Whether a person claiming to be an honorary consul could resist summons issued under section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the ground of immunity attached to consular premises.

Analysis: Section 131 confers powers akin to a civil court for discovery, production of evidence and enforcing attendance, and applies to the person to whom summons are issued. The restriction in section 8 of the Diplomatic Relations (Vienna Convention) Act, 1972 is limited to entry into diplomatic premises for serving legal process without consent of the head of mission. The claimed immunity was not available to avoid compliance with income-tax summons, particularly where the business activity and the alleged consular activity were carried on in the same premises.

Conclusion: The objection based on diplomatic or consular immunity was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner could be directed to appear before the Assessing Officer at his office instead of at the consular premises.

Analysis: Since the dispute had a practical solution and the department had no objection, the Court accepted that the petitioner could be summoned to the office of the Assistant Commissioner. The arrangement avoided the difficulty concerning the premises while preserving the statutory power to record the petitioner's statement.

Conclusion: The petitioner was directed to appear before the Assistant Commissioner's office for proceedings under section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Final Conclusion: The petition did not succeed on the claim of immunity, but the proceedings were to continue through fresh summons at the respondent's office, leaving the statutory inquiry intact.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 authorises enforcement of attendance for tax inquiry, and the limited protection against serving legal process on diplomatic premises under section 8 of the Diplomatic Relations (Vienna Convention) Act, 1972 does not confer a general immunity from compliance with such summons.

---