Central Information Commission
Rajesh Sharma vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cca) , ... on 2 December, 2022
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/CCAKP/A/2022/102490
Rajesh Sharma ......अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
O/o ITO (HQ)-1, Gorakhpur,
RTI Cell, Aayakar Bhawan,
Civil Lines, Gorakhpur,
UttarPradesh-273001. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 29/11/2022
Date of Decision : 29/11/2022
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 13/10/2021
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 16/11/2021
First Appellate Authority order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 14/01/2022
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 13.10.2021 seeking the following information:1
Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 16.11.2021. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-receipt of information, the appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Ajeet Kumar Tiwari, ITO (Hq.) & CPIO present through video- conference.
The Commission remarked at the outset that the CPIO filed a written submission dated 25.11.2022 with the following submission :
(i) Shri Rajendra Sharma, xxxx submitted the Tax Evasion Petition(TEP) application dated 01.09.2021 against Sh. Omprakash xxx, in the office of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gorakhpur (Annexure A). In this regard, your kind attention is invited towards D.O. letter dated 09.07.2020 issued from the Hon'ble Chairman, CBDT, New Delhi (Annexure B). In the context of the said DO letter it being clarified that the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax is not the competent authority to investigate the above mentioned TEP and to submit the desired report thereof. For your ready reference the relevant Para or the said DO is reproduced as under:
"...The Investigation Wing shall get, all TEPs received from the field and pending with it, entered in the ITELA module. The work of entering in the ITBA module must be completed by 31.08.2020. The Investigation Wing shall, henceforth, not transfer any TEPs to the field officers 31.08.2020..."
Therefore, in compliance the aforesaid instruction, the then CPIO (in the office of Pr. CIT, Gorakhpur) transferred it to TRO (the designated officer to discharge the 2 duty/work related TEP in the office of Pr. CIT, Gorakhpur) and subsequently, the TRO vide its office letter dated F. No. Pr.CIT/GKP/TEP/2021 dated 16.09.2021 (Annexure C) has further forwarded it to Pr. Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Lucknow (the designated & competent authority nominated by the Hon'ble Chariman, CBDT to investigate the Tax Evasion Petition) with a request to take necessary action on it and it has been registered on dated 03.01.2022 on ITBA system module of Pr. DIT, Lucknow.
(ii) Subsequently, Shri Rajendra Sharma, the applicant, filed RTI application dated 13.10.2021 (received in the office of Pr. CIT, Gorakhpur on 25.10.2022) addressed to CPI0, 0/o the Pr. CIT, Gorakhpur. Vide his RTI application; the applicant requested to know the status of his complaint dated 01.09.2021 filed against Shri Om Prakash xxxxx. As the matter pertained with the jurisdiction of JCIT, Range-1, Gorakhpur; therefore, vide this office letter dated 12.11.2021. the same was transferred to the O/o the JCIT, Range-1, Gorakhpur u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Accordingly, a copy the above mentioned letter has been sent to the applicant Sh. Rajendra Sharma.
(iii) Thereafter, the JCIT. Range-Gorakhpur has further forwarded it to the CPIO/ITO, Kushinagar being the jurisdictional assessing officer in this case and the RTI application dated 13.10.2022 has accordingly been disposed of by ITO. Kushinagar vide his office letter F. No. ITO 2(4) KSN/RTI/2021-22 dated 30.11.2021 stating the following:
...Jn this regard it is to be submitted that this office thus not received your TEP dated 01.09.2021 sent to the O/o Pr. CIT, Gorakhpur through post. Therefore, the information sought vide RTI application dated 13.10.2021 vide para 1, 2 and 3 is Nil for this office.
(iv) filed First Appeal application under the RTI Act dated 16.11.202I (received in this office on 18.11.2021) addressed to First Appellate Authority, O/o the PCIT, Gorakhpur. Since, the matter pertained with the jurisdiction of JCIT. Range-1.
Gorakhpur, the same was transferred to the First Appellate Authority/JCIT, Range-
1. Gorakhpur u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 vide this office letter dated 06. 12.2021. However, being aggrieved with the reply submitted by CPIO/TTO Kushinagar, the applicant
(v) Thereafter, the JCTT Range-Gorakhpur, the First appellate authority has given sufficient opportunities to the applicant and has passed the requisite Appeal Order dated 28.01.2022 (Annexure D) and the RTI appeal has accordingly been disposed of at her end. The relevant para of the said order is being reproduced as under:
Xxx 3
(vi) In addition to the above, it is being also brought into your kind notice that whenever a Tax Evasion Petition is being filed, according to SOP constituted vide D.O. letter dated 09.07.2020 mentioned supra, it is being forwarded 1o the office of Pr. DIT(lnv.) Lucknow, the designated authority to verify' and investigate the allegation made in the TEP thereof. In this regard, it is being further submitted that section 24(1) of the RTI Act 2005 exempts the Intelligence and Security Organizations mentioned in 2 Schedule from the purview of RTI and SI. No. 16 of the 2 schedule contains the name of such Income Tax Authority i.e. Director General of Income Tax (lnvestigation). Further, section 8 (1)(h) of the RTI Act 2005 envisages that "there is no obligation on the Central/State Public Information Officer to disclose such information to citizen, the disclosure of which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders. Therefore, as per section 8(h) of the RTI Act 2005, disclosure of information in the instant case by the O/o Pr. DIT, Lucknow which is under the process of verification and investigation is exempted.
(vii) In the light of facts submitted above, it is my humble submission that although CPIO, O/o. the ITO (HQ). Gorakhpur has been made respondent in the scheduled hearing however, it is beyond the jurisdiction of the CPIO/ITO (Hq), Gorakhpur to furnish the reply of information sought for by the applicant."
Upon persistent queries from the Commission regarding the status of the first reply to the instant RTI Application, the CPIO failed to give any cogent response as he had not enclosed a copy of his reply dated 30.11.2021 as also a copy of the FAA's order (as referred above) along with his written submission. In that way, the CPIO displayed a sheer callous disposition in merely reiterating verbatim the contents of his written submission, without divulging the sequence of events.
In short, it emerged from the written submission that the TEP which was initially received in the O/o. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gorakhpur and was subsequently transferred to the O/o Pr. Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Lucknow to investigate the Tax Evasion Petition and take necessary action. Accordingly , the TEP was registered on 03.01.2022 on ITBA system module of Pr. DIT, Lucknow. Further, the FAA in his order mentioned categorically that when ever a Tax Evasion Petition is filed, according to SOP , it is forwarded to the office of Pr. DIT(lnv.) Lucknow, to verify and investigate the allegation made in the TEP thereof. The FAA's order further held that section 24(1) of the RTI Act 2005 exempts the Intelligence and Security Organizations mentioned in 2 Schedule from the purview of RTI and SI. No. 16 of the 2 schedule contains the name of such Income Tax Authority i.e. Director General of Income Tax (investigation).
4Decision:
The Commission upon a perusal of records and more particularly considering the absence of the Appellant during hearing to plead his case, finds no infirmity in the reply coupled with factual clarification tendered by the CPIO through his written submission dated 25.11.2022, as it was in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act.
The FAA's order is very comprehensive wherein he has categorically held that section 24(1) of the RTI Act 2005 exempts the Intelligence and Security Organizations mentioned in 2 Schedule from the purview of RTI and SI. No. 16 of the 2 schedule contains the name of such Income Tax Authority i.e. Director General of Income Tax (investigation). For the sake of clarity, the relevant provision of Section 24(1) is reproduced as under:
"24. Act not to apply to certain organizations.--
(1) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, being organisations established by the Central Government or any information furnished by such organisations to that Government: Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section:..."
Furthermore, the material on record does not suggest any allegation of corruption or human rights violation in the matter, for which reason, the Commission finds no reason to invoke the proviso to Section 24(1) of the RTI Act to allow the disclosure of information, if any. Thus, no relief can be ordered in the matter.
Notwithstanding the aforesaid, the Commission admonished the conduct CPIO for being present before the bench to merely mark his presence without providing any proper update and chronology of events in a sequential manner, thus displaying a grave disregard for the hearing proceedings. In this regard, the CPIO is cautioned to be careful in future and is further advised to ensure in future that his written submissions in response to cases before hearing of the Commission reaches or are uploaded on the CIC's website along with proper enclosures prior to 48 working hours from the date of hearing of the matter.
5Lastly, attention of the CPIO is invited to the clause 4 of the CIC's hearing notice which is as under -
"....4. All the parties may submit their written submission, if any, to the Commission at least 3 working days before the date of hearing. A copy of the same shall be served upon opposite party. If any party wishes to make online submission, the same may be sent to the Commission's link only viz., http://dsscic.nic.in/online- link-paper-compliance/add....."
In view of the above said point, the CPIO is directed to provide a complete copy of his latest written submission along with the annexures to the Appellant , free of cost to the Appellant within 2 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोज पुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 6