RAM CHANDRA Vs. LAXMAN DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revision petitions have been preferred by the petitioner Ramchandra against the identical orders passed by the Civil Judge, Jodhpur, on 17th October, 1959, in two Civil Original Cases Nos. 77 of 1958 and 78 of 1958 pending between the parties. They raise common questions of law and shall be disposed of by one judgment.

(2.) THE facts which have given rise to these revision petitions may be briefly stated as follows :- It is not in dispute that a partnership was created between Ramchandra, the petitioner, and Laxmandas, Pamandas and Dharamdas, the non-petitioners, on 8th November, 1953, and the partnership business was started in the name of Messrs Arjun Das Laxmandas. THE petitioner Ramchandra filed a suit against Laxmandas, Pamandas and Dharamdas in the Court of the Civil Judge, Jodhpur, on 17th July, 1958, for the dissolution of the partnership and for rendition of accounts. This Civil Suit No. 77 of 1958. One of the defences which is relevant for the purpose of this revision is that the partnership firm was dissolved on 17/18th July, 1955, and accounts were settled. Amongst other issues, a specific issue was struck as to whether firm Arjundas Laxmandas was dissolved on 17/18 July, 1955, and that the firm's accounts up to 17th July, 1955, were also finally settled. In support of their plea of an earlier dissolution of the firm, the defendants produced certified copies of two applications alleged to have been made by the plaintiff Ramchandra on behalf of the partnership firm before the Sales Tax Officer, Jodhpur City. A prayer was also made for summoning an official of the Sales Tax Department to produce the original applications. THE plaintiff objected to the production of the certified copies and to the summoning of an official of the Sales Tax Department to produce the original applications and the Civil Judge vide his order dated 17th October, 1959, overruled the plaintiff's objections and held that the documents are admissible in evidence. In the proceedings of the same date, he further issued a direction to the Sales Tax Officer to send the original applications in a sealed cover and I am informed that the Sales Tax Officer has duly sent the original applications in a sealed cover. THE plaintiff Ramchandra has filed a revision against the order dated 17th October, 1959, of the Civil Judge, Jodhpur, and has also challenged the directions recorded in the proceedings requiring the Sales Tax Officer to send the applications in original to the Court. This revision is No. 464 of 1959.

(3.) THE object of section 54 of the Income-tax Act, in the words of Kapur, J., in Income-tax Officer, Jullundur v. THE State ([1950] 18 I.T.R. 688; A.I.R. 1950 E.P. 306), "is the secrecy of the financial affairs of the assessees as disclosed in the assessment proceedings and the reason for having a provision of this kind in the Income-tax Act is that assessees may not be reluctant to disclose the details of their business, and it is quite possible that they may not disclose their affirms without any kind of reserve unless they had an assurance that the information contained in these returns, accounts, statements and so forth furnished by them would not be divulged to any one. This is really to encourage the assessee to make a full and true disclosure of all relevant facts within his knowledge knowing that any statement made by him will not subsequently be used against him, and it appears to me that it was for this express purpose that section 54 was worded in the way that it has been done so as to give the assurance which was thought necessary for the income-tax purposes."