Central Information Commission
Mr.Mohan Lal Sharma vs Cbdt on 2 July, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New
Delhi-110066
File No.CIC/LS/A/2010/000411
Appellant Shri Mohan Lal Sharma
Public Authority Income Tax Department. Ajmer.
Date of hearing 2.7.2010
Date of decision 2.7.2010
Facts :-
The matter is called for hearing today dated 2.7.2010. The appellant is represented by his son Shri Vishal Kaushik. Nobody has appeared for the Department.
2. The matter, in short, is that Shri Vishal Kaushik got married to Shipra Kashyap r/o Ajmer in 2006. It appears that due to marital discord, they are now living separately. As per Shri Vishal Kaushik, the girl's family has lodged a criminal case against him and the members of his family alleging therein that bridegroom's family demanded and was given a huge amount in cash and other valuable effects in dowry.
3. In this context vide RTI application dated 28.4.2009, the appellant had wished to know the sources of income of the girl's father etc. It is noteworthy that the girl's father retired as a Ranger in the Forest Department and could not have given the dowry, as alleged in the FIR lodged against him and the members of his family. However, no information was provided to the appellant by the CPIO vide order dated 16.9.2009 which was affirmed by AA vide order dated 29.10.2009.
4. As mentioned above, it is a matter of marital discord between Vishal Kaushik and Shipra. The appellant has filed Tax Evasion Petition against Shilpa's father Ashok Kashyap etc. It is the legal duty of Income Tax Department to enquire into the petition and intimate the broad outcome thereof to the appellant. A similar issue had come up before this Commission in File No. CIC/LS/A/2009/001014(B.B.Singh -Vs- DGIT(Inv.), Lucknow) and the Commission vide decision dated 1.1.2010 had held as follows :-
"3. Besides, it is also to be noted that blank ban on disclosure of information regarding the action taken on tax evasion complaints may not always be in the best interest of the state revenues. In fact, it may dis-enthuse the information givers as information givers are generally keen to know whether the information provided by them has been of some value to the authorities or not. Feed back in this regard would motivate the information givers to provide further informations to the authorities and thereby enable them to curb tax evasion and enhance the state revenues. Viewed thus, despite the office of DGIT (Inv) being an exempted organisation, it may not always be the best policy to deny some kind of feed back to the information givers."
5. The ratio of the above decision squarely applies in this case. In view of the above, Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Room No. 211, Central Revenue Building, Ajmer(Raj.) (CPIO) is hereby directed to intimate the broad outcome of the TEP to the appellant in 04 months time.
Sd/-
(M.L. Sharma) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
( K.L. Das ) Assistant Registrar Address of parties :-
1. The Income Tax Officer & CPIO, Ward 2(1), Room No. 211, Central Revenue Building, Ajmer(Raj.).
2. Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, S/o late Shri Chander Bhan Sharma, C-15, Shivalik Nagar, Haridwar, Uttranchal.