Revisit digital search powers under the I-T Bill 2025
Relevance
- GS Paper 2: Governance, Right to Privacy, Regulatory frameworks
Context
- The Income-Tax Bill, 2025 proposes expanded search and seizure powers for tax authorities, allowing them access to an individual’s “virtual digital space” (e.g., emails, cloud storage, social media, devices).
- This marks a shift from the existing I-T Act, 1961, where searches were limited to physical premises like homes, lockers, or offices.
Key Provisions Proposed
- Definition of “Virtual Digital Space” includes:
- Emails
- Cloud storage
- Social media accounts
- Messaging apps (e.g., WhatsApp)
- “Any other space of similar nature” (open-ended clause)
- Access Powers:
- Tax authorities may override access codes (passwords).
- No need to disclose “reasons to believe” for search.
Issues and Concerns
- Privacy Violation
- Digital spaces often contain personal, sensitive, and non-financial data.
- Impacts not just the target individual but also contacts, e.g. friends, family, sources (especially for journalists, lawyers, professionals).
- Lack of Procedural Safeguards
- No judicial oversight or need for prior approval by a magistrate.
- Violates the principle of “reason to believe”, a standard required for lawful search.
- Absence of transparency and accountability mechanisms.
- Contradiction with SC Judgments
- Goes against the Right to Privacy (Puttaswamy case, 2017).
- Fails proportionality test:
- Legitimate aim? ✔️ (Tax enforcement)
- Necessary and least intrusive method? ❌ (No filters on access)
Global Best Practices
Canada – Section 8, Charter of Rights
- Search must be:
- Judicially authorized
- Reasonable and justified
- Based on probable grounds
United States
- Taxpayer Bill of Rights ensures due process.
- Riley v. California (2014): Warrant is mandatory before digital search due to deeply personal nature of data.
Judicial View in India
- SC Guidelines (2023) on digital device seizure recommend protocols.
- Emphasis on minimum intrusion and protection of professional confidentiality.
- Search and seizure must be:
- Rare and evidence-backed
- Cognizant of informational sensitivity
Way Forward
- Narrow the definition of “virtual digital space”.
- Introduce judicial warrants and clear thresholds of relevance.
- Establish accountability mechanisms and redressal provisions.
- Frame protocols in line with the Puttaswamy proportionality principle.
Conclusion
The proposed powers under the I-T Bill, 2025, tilt the balance toward state overreach without sufficient safeguards. While adapting enforcement to the digital era is necessary, it must be anchored in legality, necessity, and proportionality. Without these, such powers risk becoming instruments of unwarranted surveillance, undermining the very democratic values they aim to protect.
