Central Information Commission
Birjesh Kumar Verma vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cca) , ... on 15 October, 2018
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द
ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/CCITC/A/2017/151511-BJ
CIC/DGIIC/A/2017/175325-BJ
Mr. Birjesh Kumar Verma,
....अपीलकता
/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO & ITO Ward 2 (2),
O/o the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (2),
Faridabad 121001
... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 15.10.2018
Date of Decision : 15.10.2018
ORDER
File No. CIC/CCITC/A/2017/151511-BJ Date of RTI application 14.03.2016 CPIO's response 22.04.2016 Date of the First Appeal Nil First Appellate Authority's response 06.06.2016 Date of diarised receipt of Appeal by the Commission 25.07.2017 FACTS The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 10 points in respect of the Tax Evasion Petition dated 02.02.2016 against Mr. Rajender Singh Soni, whether he was an Income Tax Assessee, if yes, the certified copies of his income declared/income tax paid for the period 2010-11 to 2015-16, action taken by the Department against his complaint in view of the income disclosure by his own daughter and other issues related thereto. The CPIO, vide letter dated 22.04.2016, denied disclosure of information u/s 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005 being 'Third Party' information. Dissatisfied with the response of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 06.06.2016 while referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sh. Girish Ram Chandra Deshpande Vs. CIC in SPL (Civil) No. 27734 of 2012, upheld the response of the CPIO.
File No. CIC/DGIIC/A/2017/175325-BJ
Page 1 of 4
Date of RTI application 17.08.2017
CPIO's response 05.09.2017
Date of the First Appeal 11.09..2017
First Appellate Authority's response 16.10.2017
Date of diarised receipt of Appeal by the Commission 02.11.2017
FACTS
The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 05 points in respect of the Tax Evasion Petition dated 02.02.2016 against Mr. Rajender Singh Soni, whether investigation was still pending, action taken report or copy of the report or recovery notice, if any, details of the source of expenditure of Rs. 25 lakh in the marriage of Punita Soni on 04.02.2014 along with the certified copy of the documents which were collected during the investigation and issues related thereto.
The CPIO, vide letter dated 05.09.2017, provided a point-wise information to the Appellant wherein for points 04 & 05, the information sought was denied u/s 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005 being personal information. Dissatisfied with the response of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 16.10.2017, denied disclosure of information u/s 8(1) (h) & (j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Birjesh Kumar Verma through VC;
Respondent: Mr. Yograj, ITO and Mr. Birendra Kr. Jha, Inspector;
The Appellant reiterated the contents of his RTI applications and stated that the earlier decision of the Commission in Appeal No. CIC/DOREV/A/2016/300616-BJ dated 13.10.2017 had not been complied with, till date. The Respondent submitted that a number of correspondence had been held with the Appellant seeking some more details in the case and that the entire matter was still under examination. He produced a copy of the letters dated 03.10.2018 sent to the Appellant seeking further details of the bank accounts, etc. Acknowledging the receipt of these letters, the Appellant responded that all the desired information was being furnished by him through post.
The Commission was in receipt of a written submission from the Appellant dated 15.10.2018 (Appeal No. CIC/DGIIC/A/2017/175325-BJ) wherein the reply/order of the CPIO/FAA was reiterated. He further referred to several decisions of the Commission in Appeal Nos. CIC/SB/C/2016/900232-BJ dated 14.02.2017, CIC/DS/A/2011/003539 dated 19.03.2012, CIC/SB/C/2016/900232-BJ dated 13.10.2017 etc. to substantiate his claims. It was therefore prayed that the TEP be concluded within a period of 3 months since already more than 896 days had elapsed and that the broad outcome of the investigation should be provided to him. The Commission referred to the definition of information u/s Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 which is reproduced below:Page 2 of 4
"information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e- mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, report, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force."
Furthermore, a reference can also be made to the relevant extract of Section 2 (j) of the RTI Act, 2005 which reads as under:
"(j) right to information" means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes ........"
In this context a reference was made to the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in 2011 (8) SCC 497 (CBSE Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay), wherein it was held as under:
35..... "It is also not required to provide 'advice' or 'opinion' to an applicant, nor required to obtain and furnish any 'opinion' or 'advice' to an applicant. The reference to 'opinion' or 'advice' in the definition of 'information' in section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material available in the records of the public authority. Many public authorities have, as a public relation exercise, provide advice, guidance and opinion to the citizens. But that is purely voluntary and should not be confused with any obligation under the RTI Act."
Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Khanapuram Gandaiah Vs. Administrative Officer and Ors. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.34868 OF 2009 (Decided on January 4, 2010) had held as under:
6. "....Under the RTI Act "information" is defined under Section 2(f) which provides:
"information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e- mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, report, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force."
This definition shows that an applicant under Section 6 of the RTI Act can get any information which is already in existence and accessible to the public authority under law. Of course, under the RTI Act an applicant is entitled to get copy of the opinions, advices, circulars, orders, etc., but he cannot ask for any information as to why such opinions, advices, circulars, orders, etc. have been passed."
7. "....the Public Information Officer is not supposed to have any material which is not before him; or any information he could have obtained under law. Under Section 6 of the RTI Act, an applicant is entitled to get only such information which can be accessed by the "public authority" under any other law for the time being in force. The answers sought by the petitioner in the application could not have been with the public authority nor could he have had access to this information and Respondent No. 4 was not obliged to give any reasons as to why he had taken such a decision in the matter which was before him."
Page 3 of 4The Commission observed that similar issues were already heard and adjudicated by the Commission in Appeal No. CIC/DOREV/A/2016/300616-BJ dated 13.10.2017.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties and in the light of aforementioned decisions of the Commission, the Respondent is directed to provide the updated status in his matter to the Appellant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The Appeals stand disposed accordingly.
Bimal Julka (िबमल जु का)
Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु )
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
K.L. Das (के .एल.दास)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011-26182598/ [email protected]
दनांक / Date: 15.10.2018
Copy to:-
1. Mr. B. B. Singh, Pr. Commissioner Income Tax (Assessment), Aayakar Bhawan, New CGO Complex, NH-IV, B-Block, Faridabad 121001 (with the instruction to ensure compliance of the said decision).Page 4 of 4