The Supreme Court of India on Monday declined to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging what the petitioner described as “invasive” search and seizure powers granted to tax officials under the new income tax framework. The petition had questioned provisions allowing authorities to access and seize digital devices such as laptops and mobile phones during tax investigations.

The plea targeted provisions under the upcoming Income Tax Act, 2025, which expands the scope of searches to include “computer systems” and “virtual digital space.” This interpretation allows officials to examine personal electronic devices, emails, private chats, cloud-stored data and other electronic communications when investigating suspected tax evasion.

Entrepreneur Vishwaprasad Alva, who filed the petition, argued that the provisions give sweeping powers to authorities and could potentially infringe on citizens’ privacy rights. He also raised concerns about a clause that allows officials to conduct searches without revealing the reasons for the action to the taxpayer or even to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at the time of the raid.

Also Read: SpiceJet to Comply After Supreme Court Upholds Rs 144 Crore Deposit Order

During the hearing, senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, representing the petitioner, contended that the law could lead to unnecessary harassment of taxpayers. He suggested that while authorities may not need to disclose reasons beforehand, there should at least be an institutional mechanism to record those reasons so they can be reviewed later if required.

The bench, however, refused to hear the plea and advised the petitioner to approach the appropriate authorities with a representation seeking clarification about the provisions. The court noted that the new law is scheduled to come into force on April 1, 2026, leaving room for administrative clarification before its implementation.

The expanded search powers form part of broader changes introduced in India’s income tax regime aimed at strengthening enforcement against undisclosed income and digital-era financial activity. However, critics argue that the provisions raise important questions about privacy safeguards and the balance between investigative powers and individual rights in the digital age.

Also Read: Supreme Court Pulls Up Advocate for Frivolous CAA FIR Petition Against PM Modi, HM Shah