Confidentiality of income-tax records continues after repeal where earlier filings remain protected under saving provisions.

Confidential income-tax assessment records filed or produced while section 137 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was in force retained their protected status after its omission. Section 54 of the 1922 Act and section 137 treated such records as confidential and barred disclosure by public servants. Applying section 6(c) of the General Clauses Act, the protection attached to documents already covered by the repealed provision continued unless later legislation clearly showed a contrary intention. The later amendment to section 138, which only allowed disclosure subject to the Commissioner's control, was insufficient to remove that existing privilege or to compel production and admission in evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether documents and records of the income-tax department relating to assessments made before 1 April 1964, when section 137 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was in force, could be compelled to be produced and received in evidence after the omission of that section.

Analysis: Section 54 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and section 137 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 treated assessment records as confidential and imposed an embargo on disclosure by public servants. The omission of section 137 by the Finance Act, 1964 did not, by itself, destroy the protection already attached to documents filed or produced during the period when the section operated. Applying section 6(c) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, the Court held that repeal does not affect an accrued right, privilege, obligation, or liability unless a different intention appears. The later amendments to section 138 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 only relaxed disclosure subject to the Commissioner's control and did not show an intention to withdraw the existing privilege altogether.

Conclusion: Documents filed or produced before the income-tax authorities on or before 31 March 1964 retained their protection, could not be compelled to be produced by a court, and were not admissible in evidence; the impugned order was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute imposing confidentiality is repealed, the protection attached to documents already covered by it continues under the saving provision unless the subsequent legislation clearly evinces a different intention.

---