CHARU CHANDRA KUNDU versus GURUPADA GHOSH

Citation: [1962] 2 S.C.R. 833 · Decided: 05-05-1961 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.K. DAS · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

2 S.C.H. 
SUPREME COURT REPOHTS 833 
CHARD CHANDRA KUNDt: 
v. 
GURUPADA GHOSH 
(S. K. DAS, M. HrnAYATULLAH and J. C. SHAH, JJ.) 
Production of document-Assessment proceedings-Law 
prohibiting income-tax authorities from diBclosure Production 
of proceedings into court-- Waiver by assessee--Indian Income-fax 
Act, 6[22 (11 of 1922). s. 54. 
In a suit instituted by the respondent for the recovery of 
monies which he alleged were due to him from the appellant, 
the latter pleaded that the liability had been discharged. 
In 
support of that plea the appellant sought to tender in evidence 
a statement which he said had been made by the respondent 
before the Income·tax Officer in certain proceedings relating 
to the assessment of Income-tax of the appellant for the year 
1949-50. 
For this purpose the appellant applied to rhe trial 
court praying that the Commissioner of Income-tax might be 
asked to a1range for the production before the court of the 
recorc\ of the statement made by the respondanr. On objec-
tion raised by the Commissioner of Income-tax, the court held 
that he could not be required to produce the statement, in 
view of the prohibitions impostd by s. 54 of the Indian Income-
tax ~ct, 1922. The appellant contended that the prohibition 
contained in s. 54 of the Act related only to the evidence 
given by an assessee himself and not to that of other witnesses, 
and that, in any eYent. the provisions in that section being in 
the interest of and for the protection of the assessee only, if 
the asse£See waived the privilege, the prohibition contained 
therein would be inoperative. 
Held, that the prohibition imposed ins. 54 of the Indian 
Income-tax Act, 1922, is absolute and the operation of the 
section is not obliterated by any waiver by the assessee in 
whose assessment the evidence was tendered, document pro-
duced or record prepared. 
CrvIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal 
No. 206 of 1959. 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment 
and order dated May 28, 1956, of the Calcutta High 
Court, in Civil Rule No. 3317 of 19515. 
N. 
O. Chatterjee, A. K. Dutta and P. 
K. 
O'hatterjee, for the appellant. 
1961 --
Mav, 15. 
1961 
Oharu Chandra 
Kunclu 
v. 
Gurupada Ghosh 
Shah JJ. 
834 
SUPREME COURT REPOitTS 
[1962] 
The respondent, did not appear. 
1961. May 0. 
Judgment of the Court was 
delivered by 
SHAH, J.-Gurupada Ghosh respondent to 
this appeal filed suit No. 41 of 1953 in the 6th court 
of the Subordinate Jndge at Alipore, District 24 
Parganas, West Bengal, for a money decree against 
the 
appellant-Charu 
Chandra 
Kundu-for 
Rs. 32,132-12-::l claiming that he had advanced to 
appellant on May 11, 1949, "hy way of temporary 
accommodation loan" Rs. 30,000/- by a cheque 
drawn npon the Comilla Union Bank, Calcutta, 
and that the appellant hacl. in two instalments 
repaid Rs. fi,!iOO/- out of the amount advanrecl. and 
t.he balance of R.s. 24,liOO/- with interest. rem~incd 
due and payable by the appellant. The appellant 
pleaded by his writt{ln statement that a loan of 
Rs. 30,000/- was advanced by the respondent to 
him and his wife Chapalabala and a promissory 
note was in consideration thereof executed by the 
horrowers in favour of the respondent and as 
collateral security for the loan, title deeds of cer-
tain immovable properties belonging t\) the said 
Chapalabala were deposited with the respondent 
and that thereafter between September 7, 1949, 
and April 13, 1953, the appellant had repaid an 
aggregate amount of Rs. 37,000/- and the respon-
dent having relinquished a sum of Rs. 235-7-0 on 
account of interest on such repayment the debt 
was discharged and in acknowledgment thereof, 
the promissory note and the title deeds of the 
immovable properties lodged with the respondent 
were returned. The appellant also raised other 
pleas which are not material for the purposes of 
this appeal. On the pleadings, the burden of prov-
ing repayment lay upon the appellant. 
The appellant applied to the Subordinate 
Judge for the issue of a summons to the Commis-
sioner of Income-tax directing that officer to 
arrange to produce "thTough 11 competent officer 
2 S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
835 
the original file and depositions .given "by the 
respondent" before the Income-tax Officer I (2) 
Division in the assessment of Cham Chandra 
Kundu." The Commissioner of Income-tax in-
formed the court that having regard to the pro-
hibitions imposed bys. 54 of the Income-tax Act, 
he was unable to produ

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.