Central Information Commission
Vaidhyanathan Veerappan vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cca), ... on 6 December, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/CCACH/A/2023/641336
CIC/CCACH/A/2023/646069
Vaidhyanathan Veerappan .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Office of the Income Tax
officer, Non-Corporate Ward
17-7, Room No-517, BSNL
Tower-1, 5th Floor, No.16,
Greams Road, Chennai - 600006 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 18.11.2024
Date of Decision : 05.12.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
The above-mentioned second appeals are clubbed together as the Appellant is
common and subject-matter is similar in nature and hence are being disposed
of through a common order.
CIC/CCACH/A/2023/641336
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 29.05.2023
CPIO replied on : 12.07.2023
Page 1 of 11
First appeal filed on : 17.07.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 18.08.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 24.08.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an (offline) RTI application dated 29.05.2023 seeking the following information:
"Requested to provide the required Income related details of my Ex-wife Shubhashree Sundaram whose PAN number: ********37R and Aadhar number:********995.
My Ex-Wife (Shubhashree Sundaram) and I (Vaidhyanathan Veerappan) got divorced on 28-Apr2022 based on HMOP case (No:181/2021) order passed by Sivaganga Family court. On 17-Aug-2022, she filed Maintenance case (No: 48/2022) in Sivaganga Family court against me. In her confession statement in open court on 13-Feb-2023, she mentioned, she does not have PAN number and never filed Income tax. However, she is having PAN number (********R) and it's linked with her Aadhar number (********995) and working in a corporate company and earning income and filed income tax. Kindly please provide below documents to prove she is an income tax assessee by earning income and paying tax against the PAN number (*******37R). Herewith enclosing the court documents provided by The Family Court Sivaganga for your reference and highlighting the relevant information in yellow colour.
Kindly help me and guide me the path to prove she is having PAN and earning/earned income. Kindly provide me the below documents to the above postal address (No:12, Church 6th street, T.T Nagar Karaikudi- 630001) or to my email id: *******[email protected] or let me know the date to come to your office and collect the document.
You are requested to furnish following information/Documents.
1. Acknowledgement/Authorized letter from income tax, she (Shubhashree Sundaram) is holding PAN(********7R) and her income filing under income tax assessment.
2. As her company submitted her advance tax to the income tax for the month April 2023, May 2023, its very essential to know her income of Apr 2023, May 2023 for this case to prove she is earning.Page 2 of 11
3. Here Court will require us to prove, she (Shubhashree Sundaram) is earning income specifically during the case hearing period(Maintenance Case Filed date: Aug-2022 to Jun-2023). Hence please provide below month wise net income details of Shubhashree Sundaram (PAN: ********7R) from Aug-2022 to Jun-2023 with respective Income Tax Officer Department seal.
Month Relevant Monthly Net Income Relevant Monthly Taxable Income Aug-2022 Sep-2022 Oct-2022 Nov-2022 Dec-2022 Jan-2023 Feb-2023 Mar-2023 Apr-2023 May-2023 Jun-2023 The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 12.07.2023 stating as under:
"The information requested by the applicant is exempt from disclosure u/s 8(1)(e) of RTI Act, as the returns of income filed with the department is held in fiduciary capacity by the department. Further, this application asking for Information is hereby rejected since the RTI request relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or Interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual with reference to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also held in the case of Girish Ramachander Deshpande (decision dated 03.10.2012 SLP C.No.27734 of 2012) that income tax returns are exempt from disclosure u/s 8(1) of RTI Act, as it is personal information filed by the assessee with the income tax department and Its disclosure would cause an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. Hence, the information called for its exempt from disclosure."Page 3 of 11
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 17.07.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 18.08.2023, upheld the reply of the CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/CCACH/A/2023/646069 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 18.07.2023 CPIO replied on : 08.08.2023 First appeal filed on : 14.08.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 12.09.2023 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 23.09.2023 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an (offline) RTI application dated 18.07.2023 seeking the following information:
"Requested to provide the required Income related details of my Ex-wife Shubhashree Sundaram whose Pan number: ********7R and Aadhar number: ********995. My Ex-Wife (Shubhashree Sundaram) and I (Valdhyanathan Veerappan) got divorced on 28-Apr2022 based on HMOP case (No:181/2021) order passed by Sivaganga Family court. On 17-Aug-2022, she filed Maintenance case (No: 48/2022) in Sivaganga Family court against me. In her confession statement in open court on 13-Feb-2023, she mentioned, she is not having PAN number and new filed income tax. However, she is having PAN number (********37R) and it's linked with her Aadhar number (********995) and working in a corporate company and earning income and filed income tax. On 26-Jun- 2023, SBICAP security representative submitted the document the Sivaganga Family court which proves she has nearly Rs.52,00,000/-56 lakh rupees worth of equity shares on 31-Dec-2022 and they also mentioned she has nearly Rs.26,00,000/-26 lakh worth of equity shares on 21-Jun-2023. Hence, it's a fact she is earning income via equal share dividend also. Hence Kindly please provide below documents to prove she is an income tax assessee by earning income and paying the against the PAN number (FSEPS4737R). Herewith enclosing the court documents provided by The Family Court Sivaganga for your reference and highlighting the relevant Information in yellow colour.
In an identical case, the Hon. Central Information Commission, in its order dated 06-11-2020, in 2nd Appel No .CIC/CCIT J/A/2019/108747 has Page 4 of 11 directed the Income Tax Department to inform the appellant about the detail of the net taxable income/gross Income of the spouse. In my previous RTI application (C.No: NCW-17(7)/RT1/2023-24, xxxxx received on date 23-05-2023) they provided her net Income Information of financial year 2021-2022, however I also require similar Information for the financial year(2022-2023) to prove she is earning. Hence Kindly provide me the below documents/Information to the above postal address (No:12, Church 6th street, T.T. Nagar Karaikudi, Tamlinadu- 630001) or to my email id: [email protected] or let me know the date to come to your office and collect the document..
You are requested to furnish following information/Documents.
1. Acknowledgement/Authorized letter from income tax, she (Shubhashree Sundaram) is holding PAN(********7R) and her income fill under income tax assessment.
2. In court she mentioned she is not having any income from 18-Feb- 2021. We require her net income during the financial year 2021-2022, 2022-2023, 2023-2024 as below to prove she is earning during this period.
Financial From Month To Month Net Income Taxable
Year during this Income
period during
this
period
2021-2022 01-April-2021 31- March-2022
2022-2023 01-April-2022 31-March-2023
2023-2024 01-April-2023 Till date
3. As her company submitted her advance tax to the income tax from the month of August 2022 to the month of July 2023, its very essential to know her Income from the month of August 2022 to the month of July 2023 for this case to prove she is earning.
4. Here Court will require us to prove, she (Shubhashree Sundaram) is earning income specifically during the case hearing xxxxxxx (Maintenance Case Filed date: Aug-2022 to July-2023). Hence please provide below month wise net Income details of Shubhashree Sundari (PAN: ********37R) from Aug-2022 to July-2023 with respective Income Tax Officer Department seal.
Page 5 of 11
Month Relevant Monthly Net Relevant Monthly Taxable
Income Income
Aug-2022
Sep-2022
Oct-2022
Nov-2022
Dec-2022
Jan-2023
Feb-2023
Mar-2023
Apr-2023
May-2023
June-2023
July-2023
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 08.08.2023 stating as under:
"The applicant Shri Vaithyanathan Veerappan filed an application under Right to Information Act 2005 dated 18.07.2023 seeking information on net income earned by his ex-wife, Ms.Shubhashree Sundaram for Financial Years 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 based on income tax returns filed by her.
The information requested by the applicant is exempt from disclosure u/s 8(1)(e) of RTI Act, as the returns of income filed with the department is held in fiduciary capacity by the department. Further, this application asking for information is hereby rejected since the RTI request relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual with reference to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Girish Ramachander Deshpande (decision dated 03.10.2012 SLP C.No.27734 of 2012) that income tax returns are exempt from disclosure u/s 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, as it is personal information filed by the assessee with the income tax department and its disclosure would cause an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. Hence, the information called for its exempt from disclosure.Page 6 of 11
Further, the petitioner, in the instant case, has not made a bonafide public interest in seeking information and the disclosure of such information would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.08.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 12.09.2023, upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through video conference.
Respondent: Ms. Chitra Venkat, ITO, appeared through video conference.
The appellant inter alia submitted that information sought was not provided by the respondent. He stated that he has not sought any information pertaining to third party. The appellant submitted that he and his Ex-Wife (Shubhashree Sundaram) got divorced on 28.04.2022 based on the order passed by Sivaganga Family court. On 17.08.2022, she filed Maintenance case (No: 48/2022) in Sivaganga Family court against the appellant. The appellant informed that in her confession statement in open court on 13.02.2023, she stated that she has neither PAN card nor any source of income. However, the appellant stated that she was having PAN number (********37R) which was linked with her Aadhar number and she was working in a corporate company. The appellant pleaded that a maintenance case in the Family Court is pending and documents are required for the court purpose.
The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that information sought pertained to personal information of third party, held by them under fiduciary capacity and disclosure of the same has no relationship to any public activity or Interest. Accordingly, the information was denied under Section 8(1) (e) and (j) of the RTI Act, 2005.Page 7 of 11
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, noted that the appellant sought information regarding income details of his ex-wife Shubhashree Sundaram. The respondent vide letter dated 17.03.2023 denied the information under section 8 (1) (e) and (j) of the RTI Act.
The appellant submitted that he and his Ex-Wife (Shubhashree Sundaram) got divorced on 28-Apr2022 based on the order passed by Sivaganga Family court. On 17-Aug-2022, she filed Maintenance case (No: 48/2022) in Sivaganga Family court against the appellant and her confession statement in open court on 13- Feb-2023, she stated that she has neither PAN card nor any source of income. However, the appellant stated that she was having PAN number (********37R) which was linked with her Aadhar number and she was working in a corporate company. The appellant pleaded that a maintenance case in the Family Court is pending and documents are required for the court purpose.
The Commission referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commission & ors. SLP (C) No. 27734 of 2012 dated 03/10/2012 wherein it was held as under:
14. "The details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are "personal information" which stand exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, unless involves a larger public interest and the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information."
However, making a distinction with the said judgment, the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of M.P. in the matter of Smt. Sunita Jain vs. Pawan Kumar Jain and others W.A. No. 168/2015 and Smt. Sunita Jain vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and others W.A. No. 170/2015 dated 15.05.2018 had in a matter where the information seeker had sought the salary details of her husband from the employer held as under:
"While dealing with the Section 8(1)(j) of the Act, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the appellant and the respondent No.1 are husband and wife and as a wife she is entitled to know what remuneration the respondent Page 8 of 11 No.1 is getting. Present case is distinguishable from the case of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande (supra) and therefore the law laid down by their Lordships in the case of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande (supra) are not applicable in the present case. In view of the foregoing discussion, we allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the Writ Court in W.P. No.341/2008. Similarly, the W.A. No.170/2015 is also allowed and the impugned order passed in W.P. No.1647/2008 is set aside."
Moreover, the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) in the matter of Rajesh Ramachandra Kidile vs. Maharashtra SIC and Ors in W.P. No. 1766 of 2016 dated 22.10.2018 held as under:
"8. Perusal of this application shows that the salary slips for the period mentioned in the application have been sought for by the Advocate. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the salary slips contain such details as deductions made from the salary, remittances made to the Bank by way of loan instalments, remittances made to the Income Tax Authority towards part payment of the Income Tax for the concerned month and other details relating to contributions made to Provident Fund, etc. It is here that the information contained in the salary slips as having the characteristic of personal nature. Any information which discloses, as for example, remittances made to the Income tax Department towards discharge of tax liability or to the Bank towards discharge of loan liability would constitute the personal information and would encroach upon the privacy of the person. Therefore as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Girish Ramachandra Deshpande (supra) such an information could not be disclosed under the provisions of the RTI Act. This is all the more so when the information seeker is a person who is totally stranger in blood or marital relationship to the person whose information he wants to lay his hands on. It would have been a different matter, had the information been sought by the wife of the petitioner in order to support her contention in a litigation, which she filed against her husband. In a litigation, where the issue involved is of maintenance of wife, the information relating to the salary details no longer remain confined to the category of personal information concerning both husband and wife, which is available with the husband hence accessible by the wife. But in the present case, as stated earlier, the application has not been filed by the wife.Page 9 of 11
9. Then, by the application filed under the provisions of the RTI Act, information regarding mere gross salary of the petitioner has not been sought and what have been sought are the details if the salary such as amounts relating to gross salary, take home salary and also all the deductions from the gross salary. It is such nature of the information sought which takes the present case towards the category of exempted information.
10. All these aspects of the matter have not been considered by the authority below and, therefore, I find that its order is patently illegal, not sustainable in the eyes of law."
In light of the above observations, the Respondent should ascertain that the Appellant is the Ex-husband of Ms. Shubhashree Sundaram and there is a maintenance case/matrimonial case pending before the Court. For said purpose, the Appellant is directed to submit complete relevant documents related to maintenance case before the Respondent Public Authority, within a week from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of the same and on being satisfied, the Respondent is directed to provide the "generic details of the net taxable income/gross income" of the estranged wife for the period as mentioned in the RTI application. The above directions are to be complied with by the respondent within three weeks from the date of receipt of the documents from the Appellant. The other personal information of third party need not to be disclosed to the appellant.
The FAA to ensure compliance of this order.
The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 10 of 11 Copy To:
The FAA The Joint Commission of Income Tax, Non Corporate Range, O/o the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Range-17, Room No.520, 5th Floor, Tower-2, BSNL Building, No.16, Greams Road, Chennai - 600006 Page 11 of 11 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)