JUDGMENT
BURN, J. – In my opinion the decision of the learned District Judge is correct.
Secondary evidence of the contents of the Income-tax return is admissible, according to the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, under section 65 (a) of the Evidence Act. I am however unable to agree that the Income-tax Officer is not subject to the process of the Court; on the contrary he is subject to every process of the Court, but under Section 54 of the Income-tax Act the Court cannot require him to produce before it any of the documents mentioned in that section. Section 54 of the Income-tax Act the Court cannot require him to produce before it any of the documents mentioned in that section. Section 54 of the Income-tax Act lays a prohibition on the Court; it does not confer any exemption on the Income-tax Officer.
There is no other provision of law under which secondary evidence would be admissible.
This petition is accordingly dismissed with costs.
Petition dismissed.