Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Central Information Commission

Mr.Rajesh Babulal Jain vs Cbdt on 21 June, 2013

                        CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                              Club Building (Near Post Office)

                           Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067

                                   Tel: +91-11-26105682



                              File No.CIC/RM/A/2012/000971



Appellant:                                   Shri Rajesh Babulal Jain, Pune



Public Authority:                            ITO, Ward 11(2) & Addl. CIT, Range-11, Pune



Date of Hearing:                             21.06.2013



Date of decision:                            21.06.2013



Heard today, dated 21.06.2013.

Appellant is present.

The Public Authority is represented by Shri SC Sarangi, JCIT, Pune/AA along with
Shri Sada Warte, ITO Ward 11(2) Pune/CPIO.

FACTS

Vide RTI dt 17.2.12, appellant had sought IT related documents, including statement of accounts, income and expenditure accounts, balance sheet, list of owners etc in respect of Jai Jawan Educational Society, Pune for the period 2009- 2012.

2. CPIO vide letter dt 28.3.12, informed the appellant that a notice u/s 11(1) was issued to the Society, being third party and in their response, they have strongly objected to any information being shared. The CPIO added that as this was a public charitable Trust and its activities related to the public, people are entitled to gather information about the Society and as such he was inclined to furnish the information sought, however, the information for FY 2011-12 is not readily available in the office. In response to request for list of donors and receipts issued to them, CPIO informed that such information was not available with the office.

3. An appeal was filed on 8.6.12.

4. AA vide order dt 21.6.12 observed that as there is no mention of exactly why the appellant is not satisfied with the decision given by the CPIO, the appeal is considered as infructuous.

1

5. Submissions made by the appellant and public authority were heard. AA submitted that part of information relating to AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 has been provided by the CPIO. However, information in respect of AY 2012-13 was not available and hence has not been provided. In response to a query from the Commission, AA submitted that a notice u/s 11(1) had been issued to the Society and they had strongly objected to the information being shared. The appellant submitted that he is a founder member of the Society but the present office bearers are not inviting him to any meetings nor share any information with him.

DECISION

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande has held that Income Tax Returns is personal information and exempt from disclosure u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act unless larger public interest is shown. In the instant case, the appellant has not been able to show any larger public interest. The ratio of the above case applies to the present appeal and the appeal before the Commission is rejected.

Sd/-

(Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy forwarded to:

The ITO & CPIO O/o the Income Tax officer Ward 11(2), PMT Building, 2nd Floor, "C" Wing, Shankarsheth Road, Swargate, Pune -411037.
The Addl.CIT & First Appellate Authority O/o the Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -11, Pune Shri Jain Rajesh Babulal 40/2, Digamber Nagar, Lane No 4, Near Soni Classes, Vadgaonsheri, Dist -Pune -411014.
(Raghubir Singh) 2 Deputy Registrar .06.2013 3