NAYUDU, J. - (1.) THESE civil rules have been heard together as they involve a common question of constitutional law, namely, whether section 37(2) of the Indian Income -tax Act è(Act XI of 1922), infringes the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India in articles 14 and 19(r)(f) and (g) thereof.
(2.) BEFORE this question is taken up for consideration, it would be useful and necessary that the facts alleged in the petitions are briefly set out. In Civil Rule 195 of 1962, the petitioner is one Senairam Doongarmall Agency (Private) Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act and having its registered office at Tinsukia, in the Lakhimpur district, of the State of Assam. Shri K.E.Johnson, the Commissioner of Income -tax, Assam, Tripura and Manipur, is impleaded as the first respondent, apparently in his personal capacity. The second respondent is the Commissioner of Income -tax, Assam, Tripura and Manipur, having his office at Shillong, the headquarters of the State of Assam. The third respondent is the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income - tax, Assam, holding his office at Shillong. The fourth respondent is the Additional Income -tax Officer, Dibrugarh, in the State of Assam. The fifth and sixth respondents were the employees of the petitioner -company, whose services had been dispensed with by the petitioner. The seventh respondent is the Income -tax Officer, Dibrugarh, in the State of Assam. The eight and the ninth respondents are the Income -tax Officers of Digboi and Tinsukia, respectively, in the State of Assam. The tenth respondent is the Additional Superintendent of Police at Dibrugarh, and the eleventh respondent is the Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance (Revenue Division), Government of India.
(3.) THE petitioner company was carrying on extensive business as wholesale dealers of various foodgrains, mustard oil and other commodities having its sales depot as well as its own railway siding at the Siding Bazaar, Tinsukia. The petitioner -company was being regularly assessed with income -tax from year to year, by the Income -tax Officer, Dibrugarh, the fourth respondent, and had been duly and regularly paying its taxes in accordance with the orders of assessment passed in respect of its said business from time to time. There was never any default, failure or neglect on the part of the petitioner to produce any of the books, documents and papers necessary for completing the assessment proceedings, and the petitioner gave no occasion for the income -tax authorities at any time to have any complaint regarding the conduct of the petitioner and particularly in the production of the books, documents, etc., in the course of and required for the assessment proceedings from time to time. The petitioner fully co -operated with the income -tax authorities in arriving at a proper and correct assessment of the income of the petitioners business and had been regularly paying the taxes according to assessment, as evidenced by the income -tax clearance certificate dated August 7, 1961, in respect of the petitioners business for the assessment year 1959 -60.;