https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8401 After the omission of section 137 of the Income-tax Act from 1 April 1964, there was no surviving statutory bar preventing a civil court from calling for and receiving income-tax records for later periods. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act did not preserve the omitted confidentiality restriction for those records, and the notifications under section 138(2) were confined to banking companies rather than creating a general prohibition on disclosure. Section 138(1)(b) was treated as an enabling provision for voluntary furnishing of information by the Commissioner, not as a limit on the civil court's power to summon documents. The objection to production therefore failed. en-us Sat, 28 Aug 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8401 After the omission of section 137 of the Income-tax Act from 1 April 1964, there was no surviving statutory bar preventing a civil court from calling for and receiving income-tax records for later periods. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act did not preserve the omitted confidentiality restriction for those records, and the notifications under section 138(2) were confined to banking companies rather than creating a general prohibition on disclosure. Section 138(1)(b) was treated as an enabling provision for voluntary furnishing of information by the Commissioner, not as a limit on the civil court's power to summon documents. The objection to production therefore failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 28 Aug 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8401