https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9116 Communications and draft orders relating to assessment and penalty proceedings conducted in a quasi-judicial capacity were not protected by privilege under section 124 of the Evidence Act. The officers deciding such matters had to act independently on the evidence and could not be directed or advised by higher authorities on how to decide an individual case, so the correspondence was not made in official confidence. Disclosure of settlement papers and draft assessment or penalty orders was not shown to harm public interest merely because it might assist the assessee on appeal. The privilege claim failed because it was directed at strengthening the Department's defence rather than protecting public interest. en-us Fri, 30 Nov 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9116 Communications and draft orders relating to assessment and penalty proceedings conducted in a quasi-judicial capacity were not protected by privilege under section 124 of the Evidence Act. The officers deciding such matters had to act independently on the evidence and could not be directed or advised by higher authorities on how to decide an individual case, so the correspondence was not made in official confidence. Disclosure of settlement papers and draft assessment or penalty orders was not shown to harm public interest merely because it might assist the assessee on appeal. The privilege claim failed because it was directed at strengthening the Department's defence rather than protecting public interest. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 Nov 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9116