Supreme Court To Examine Challenge To I-T Law Allowing Searches Of Digital Devices

A public interest petition filed under Article 32 challenges Section 247 of the Income Tax Act, 2025, which is scheduled to come into force on April 1, 2026. The provision authorises Income Tax authorities to search not only physical premises but also “computer systems” and “virtual digital space.”

Invest in Indian Markets and Unlock Future Potential With 5paisa!

Open Account Now

The challenge also covers corresponding provisions under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The petitioner, entrepreneur Vishwaprasad Alva, has argued that the law permits access to personal electronic devices, cloud servers and private electronic communications, including by overriding access controls, without prior judicial authorisation.

Court Hears Preliminary Submissions

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice N V Anjaria heard preliminary submissions and adjourned the matter for further hearing next week.

Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that earlier rulings upholding search powers must be revisited in light of the Supreme Court’s recognition of privacy as a fundamental right in K S Puttaswamy v Union of India (2017).

He argued that the provision allows searches based on an officer’s belief that a person “will not” or “would not” produce documents or disclose assets if summoned, creating what he described as an anticipatory search framework.

Bench Notes Scope Of Judicial Review

Justice Bagchi referred to the 2022 ruling in Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation) v Laljibhai Kanjibhai Mandalia, where the court recognised a limited scope of judicial review over search authorisations.

He observed that courts can examine whether there is a rational nexus between the material available with tax authorities and the belief recorded for initiating a search. If no such nexus exists, the procedure can be set aside.

The Bench also noted concerns about destruction of electronic evidence if advance notice is given, with observations that digital data may be stored in the cloud or on foreign servers.

Privacy Concerns Raised

The petition contends that the expansion of search powers into the digital domain amounts to a serious intrusion into informational privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.

It argues that existing mechanisms such as summons and assessments are less intrusive alternatives and that permitting digital searches on speculative grounds fails the test of proportionality.

The petitioner has sought either striking down the challenged provisions or reading them down with safeguards such as independent oversight, disclosure of reasons and clear guidelines to prevent misuse.