SURAJMULL NAGARMULL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Click here to view full judgement.
P.B.Mukharji, J. -
(1.) We are unanimous on this Special Bench that the Rule' must be discharged.
(2.) Search of a citizen's home and seizure of his books and documents without a warrant from any Court or Magistrate are, on this application, challenged as unconstitutional and illegal. Many sleeping lions, if not passions, are roused and the old forgotten war cries of the 18th Century legal battle of Entick v. Carrington (1765) 19 State Tr 1029, came roaring through the corridors of history to face the jaded jurisprudence of the 20th Century to find it unresponsive. Prized freedoms, newly won then, have now after two centuries, become too old to defend themselves.
(3.) This Reference to the Special Bench under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India read with the Original Side Rules for Special Bench (Chapter V, Rules 2 and 3 of the Original Side Rules) raises (1) the question of constitutional validity of Section 37 (2) of the Income-tax Act and (2) the question of the statutory legality of the steps taken under the same, section of the same Act. This application challenges the constitutional validity of the statutory powers of search and seizure under Section 37 (2) of the Income-tax Act.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.