The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) has sent a letter to Baijayant Panda, Chairperson of the Select Committee of the Lok Sabha to Examine the Income Tax Bill, 2025, urging a review of the Bill due to concerns regarding excessive surveillance, privacy violations, and potential misuse by enforcement agencies under Clauses 247, 249, and 261.
The letter stated that these “provisions allow authorities to search, access, and seize virtual digital spaces, creating the risk of excessive surveillance, privacy violations, and potential misuse by enforcement agencies.”
The foundation urged the Select Committee to reconsider its provisions and introduce safeguards to prevent arbitrary enforcement.
They called for a review of Clauses 247, 249, and 261, to ensure that the proposed digital search and seizure provisions uphold constitutional safeguards and prevent excessive enforcement powers.
The letter demanded that “these clauses must explicitly incorporate the proportionality standard, as established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1, by requiring the least invasive methods and defining “reasons to believe” to prevent arbitrary action.”
They further stated that, in order to ensure fairness and clarity, judicial precedent, such as Pr. DIT (Inv) v. Laljibhai Kanjibhai Mandalia (2022) 446 ITR 18 (SC), should guide these provisions.
The letter highlighted the essentiality of an Independent judicial oversight, noting that while internal departmental approvals currently suffice, judicial warrants similar to practices in the U.S. and the European Union are needed to enhance accountability.
“The applicability of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (“BNSS”), 2023, under Clause 249(10), provides an opportunity to introduce additional safeguards. Section 94 of BNSS allows courts or police officers to issue written orders for summoning digital evidence, ensuring due process. Additionally, Clause 249’s restriction on disclosing investigative reasons prevents taxpayers from effectively challenging searches. Courts, including in Ajit Jain v. Union of India, 242 ITR 302, have recognized that complete secrecy undermines judicial review,” reads the letter.
They argued that the Income Tax Bill, 2025, currently lacks provisions for the secure preservation of digital evidence, such as hash-value validation, which is a matter of ongoing litigation in the Supreme Court.
Therefore, they emphasized the need for clear technical and legal guidelines to prevent tampering and misuse.
The letter stated that without these necessary safeguards, the Income Tax Bill, 2025, risks enabling unchecked surveillance and infringing on privacy rights, emphasizing the need for a thorough review to ensure alignment with constitutional principles and prevent potential misuse.
“We hope that the Select Committee will uphold constitutional values and the spirit of transparency,” reads the letter, urging careful consideration of the matter and expressing willingness to provide a formal submission, testimony, or any other assistance the committee may require.
 has sent a letter to Baijayant Panda, Chairperson of the Select Committee of the Lok Sabha to Examine the Income Tax Bill, 2025, urging a review of the Bill due to concerns regarding excessive surveillance, privacy violations, and potential misuse by enforcement agencies under Clauses 247, 249, and 261.){kind=link}