Refusal to sign a recorded statement is not omission to give evidence; penal liability must stay within the statute.

A witness summoned under section 131 of the Income-tax Act who appeared, gave a recorded statement, but refused to sign it was not liable to a fine under section 131(2) for omission to give evidence. The statutory default is confined to failure to attend, failure to produce books or documents, or intentional omission to give evidence in response to the summons. The recording of evidence is not invalidated by the witness's refusal to sign, and neither Order 18 Rule 5 CPC nor section 80 of the Evidence Act makes signature a condition precedent to evidentiary value. Penal liability must be strictly confined to the actual statutory default.

---

---

Issues: Whether a witness summoned under section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, who appeared before the Income-tax Officer and gave a recorded statement but refused to sign it, could be fined under section 131(2) for omission to give evidence.

Analysis: The statutory default under section 131(2) is confined to failure to attend, failure to produce books or documents, or intentional omission to give evidence in response to the summons. The recording of evidence by the Income-tax Officer is not rendered ineffective merely because the witness does not sign the statement. Neither Order 18 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, nor section 80 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, requires the witness's signature as a condition precedent to the statement becoming evidence. A penal provision must be strictly applied, and liability cannot be enlarged beyond the actual statutory default.

Conclusion: The refusal to sign the statement did not amount to omission to give evidence, and the fine under section 131(2) was not justified.

---