Central Information Commission
Mr.Mai Kamaliwali Jan Kalyan ... vs Cbdt on 4 June, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/LS/A/2010/000380 dated 15.3.2010
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Mai Kamliwali Jan Kalyan Charitable Trust
Respondent - Directorate of Income Tax (Exemptions)/
Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta
Decision announced: 4.6.2010
Facts:
We have received an appeal from Mai Kamliwali Jan Kalyan Charitable Trust through its attorney Shri S. N. P. Punj praying that "we request you to kindly register our objections to give information which is not to be legally given to M. Rakesh Kumar Gupta under Section 19 of the RTI Act as the information with the income tax department is in fiduciary relationship." The appeal has arisen from the decision of Appellate Authority Shri P. V. Rao, Director, Income Tax (Exemptions), New Delhi in Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta vs. ITO Headquarters (Exemptions) in an order of 21.12.09 in which appellant Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta had sought the following information:
"1. Kindly provide assessing officer, name with designation (complete with Ward/Circle/Range number) and address in which jurisdiction following entity / assessee are assessable (as per list enclosed).
2. Kindly provide Notification's / order (if any and at any time for any period) - exempting their income under any sub section of section 10 to 12A for the entity / assessee listed in the list attached.
3. Kindly provide Notification / order (if any and at any time for any period) - giving donation / subscription / contribution to the entity / assessee listed attached is exempt (including in part) under section 80G / any other section of Income Tax Act, 2005.
4. Kindly provide Notification / order (if any and at any time for any period) - exempting their income under any sub section of Section 11/12/12-A for the entity / assessee list attached.
5. Kindly provide inspection of assessment records for AY 2001-02 and onward subsequent year for assessee / entity covered (for which any Notification / order is issued in Point 2 to 4) for which records are available to verify certain information.1
6. Kindly provide the copy of documents pointed out at the time of inspection."
Upon this, CPIO had, on the basis of reference to third party refused the information sought. Finding, however, that the Mai Kamliwali Jan Kalyan Charitable Trust listed at Sr. No. 15 among the third parties "has given consent for disclosure of information", Appellate Authority Shri P. V. Rao had directed as follows:
"The CPIO is directed to furnish the information which is available with him and in case, it is not available write to the assessing officer concerned to take necessary action as per mutual convenience of the AO and the appellant."
In conclusion, however, Appellate Authority Shri P. V. Rao has held as follows:
"It essentially flows from the above that disclosure of information related to point Nos. 5 & 6 would cause unwarranted invasion into the privacy of the Income Tax Assessee concerned (so far as Income Tax Department is concerned there is no distinction and discrimination regarding status of an Assessee and all types of Assessee (whether Firm, Company, Individual, Trust, AOP, HUF etc. are all bracketed as Persons) stand on equal footing as regards their accounts, ITRs etc. is concerned. Therefore, keeping in view all the facts, the decision of the ITO (Hqrs.) (E) / CPIO is not disclosing the information as per point Nos. 5 & 6 to the appellant is upheld."
The appeal was heard on 4.6.2010. The following are present:
Appellant Shri S. Punj Respondents Shri Sunil Chopra, Chief Commissioner of IT Central Shri Arun S. Bhatnagar, CIT(C-II), New Delhi. Shri P. Ray Chaudhuri, Advocate Shri V. M. Mahidhar, ACIT, CC-3, New Delhi.
Shri I. P. Bansal, Judicial Member, ITAT Shri V S. Dhanda, ITO HQ (Exemptions) Shri Rakesh K. Gupta (Third Party in present case) Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta is present as third party, hence respondent, since it is on his appeal that the decision was taken. Appellant Shri Punj 2 submitted that his Organization has never given its consent for disclosure but confusion appears to have arisen because of a wrong address. Had his Trust received the letter from the CPIO, they would not have agreed to the disclosure. Shri P. Ray Chaudhury, Learned Counsel for respondents submitted that this matter had been brought to the notice of Appellate Authority who had given his decision in the mistaken belief that Mai Kamliwali Jan Kalyan Charitable Trust had given its consent and that this has turned out to be an error of fact. Appellate Authority has stayed his decision and the matter is now under reconsideration.
DECISION NOTICE In light of the above, and because there has not been a final decision on the matter by Appellate Authority, Director of Income Tax (Exemptions), the order of Shri P. V. Rao of 21.1.10 is, therefore, set aside and the case remanded to him for a decision on the basis of the facts now accessible to him within fifteen working days of the date of receipt of this Decision Notice.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 4.6.2010 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.
(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar) Joint Registrar 4.6.2010 3