Purpose of requirement of past ITRs while applying Arms Licence.

Dear learned friends, I was browsing the Delhi Police Website as well as the website of Gandhinagar Police, Gujarat, I noticed that now licensing authorities ask for for the income Tax Returns filed in recently passed 3 years to be attached with the AL Application. While going through the Arms Act of India 1959 and Arms rule 1962, I didn't found any such requirement. If it's to know the financial condition of the applicant and consider it as one of the criteria for the grant of licence, it's against the soul of right to equality and right to justice without being biased on the basis of race, cast, creed, religion, s*x, ethnicity and not the least on oneself's economic condition. And most of all The Arms Act of India 1959, Section 14(2) states “The licensing authority shall not refuse to grant any license to any person merely on the ground that such person does not own or possess sufficient property”, then what is the purpose of making ITRs mandatory to be attached with the AL Applications? Also the requirement to prove that you have a serious threat to your life for the application of an AL under self defence quota have quashed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in judgement for Writ Petition No. 21780 of 2009, dated: 31.05.2010, Syed Afzal Mehdi vs The state of A.P. stating....... " ...............A situation may develop in a sudden and unforeseen manner, e.g., a gang of dacoits may suddenly break into the house of a citizen in the dead of the night or a terrorist may try to kill a person or a sudden riot may take place without anyone anticipating even moments before such events taking place. The State is unable to fully protect the lives of its citizens and more often the Police arrive at the scene after the damage is done only to find out the cause for the occurrence. As a result, the innocent victims are falling prey to the violence unleashed by desperados. It is in this situation that the State should feel the responsibility of protecting the lives and properties of the citizens by rationally interpreting the provisions of the Act to advance the purpose for which it is made. From the admitted facts of the present case, it is quite evident that the petitioner has a clean record and has not been involved in any criminal or land grabbing case as an accused...."