Central Information Commission
Sagar Sharma vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cca) , ... on 23 March, 2026
के ीय सू चना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/CCITM/A/2024/631139
Sagar Sharma .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Office of the Income Tax
Officer-28(2)(1), Room No.
326, 3rd Floor, Vashi Railway
Station Complex, Vashi, Navi
Mumbai - 400703 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 23.02.2026
Date of Decision : 23.03.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 15.09.2023
CPIO replied on : 25.09.2023
First appeal filed on : 26.09.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 12.06.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 21.07.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.09.2023 (online) seeking the following information:CIC/CCITM/A/2024/631139 Page 1 of 7
"I am husband of Mamta Sharma. Our marriage was performed in November 2021 in Nerul I have filed a divorce case against Mamta Sharma. As a counterblast she has lodged a false Domestic Violence case against me and my family under section 12 18 19 20 21 22 and 23 pending before Hon'ble court 14th Jt CJJD and JMFC Belapur Navi Mumbai Maharashtra. Copy of DV case Annexures is enclosed The undersigned financial interest is affected in the matter so undersigned is seeking legal relief from the Court.
Mamta Sharma has not provided her Job details nor her income details case but I have cognizance of the fact that she has been working even after willfully leaving matrimonial home and even after making complaint against me and my family Details of Mamta Sharma PAN FRDxxxxx. Assessed to tax Navi Mumbai 400 706 Her present address is Room No. 14 NL6 Sector 8 Near MGM School Nerul Navi Mumbai 400706 Request you to kindly provide me the information under Section 6(1) of RTI Act 2005 on the following questions
1. Did my wife Mamta Sharma file tax return for FY 2022-23 FY 2021-22 and FY 2020-21?
2. Kindly confirm if the PANF***xxxxx about Mamta Sharma is correct.
3. Kindly provide copy of the aforesaid income-tax returns for FY 2022- 23, FY 2021-22 and FY 2020-21.
4. Kindly provide acknowledgment copy in ITR V of the aforesaid income- tax returns.
5.Kindly provide details of Gross Income, Taxable Income, Source of Income and Taxes paid?
6. Kindly provide the details of the person (name and PAN) who deducted TDS in her name for the FY 2023-24.CIC/CCITM/A/2024/631139 Page 2 of 7
2. The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 25.09.2023 stating as under:
"Point no. 1 to 6: As the information requested (from 1 to 6) pertains to third party who object her email letter dated 24.09.2023. Hence the same cannot vide be provided."
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.09.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 12.06.2024, upheld the reply of CPIO.
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent despite notice.
Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar, CPIO/Income Tax officer, appeared through video conference.
5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal/Complaint on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 21.07.2024 is not available on record. The Respondent confirmed non-service. Thus, Regulation No. 10 of the Central Information Commission Management Regulations 2007 has not been complied with by the Appellant.
6. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that information sought pertained to third party, hence, the same was denied under section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act. Upon being queried, the Respondent replied that as per their record, the third party has filed her ITR for the AY 2022-2023.
CIC/CCITM/A/2024/631139 Page 3 of 7Decision:
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent and perusal of the records, notes that the Appellant sought information relating to the income tax returns and financial particulars of his wife, namely Mamta Sharma, in the context of ongoing matrimonial litigation. The information sought included copies of income tax returns, acknowledgment forms, details of gross income, taxable income, sources of income, and TDS particulars for multiple financial years. The CPIO, vide reply dated 25.09.2023, denied the information on the ground that it pertains to a third party who had objected to disclosure.
8. It is noted that during the course of hearing, the Respondent has confirmed that the third-party has filed Income Tax Return for the Assessment Years (AY) 2023-2023 only.
9. The Commission observes that while Income Tax Returns (ITR) as such may constitute personal information, it is equally well settled that in matrimonial and maintenance disputes, limited disclosure of income particulars of the spouse is permissible to ensure effective adjudication of such cases. Courts and the Commission have consistently held that a legally wedded spouse seeking income information for maintenance proceedings demonstrates a larger public interest, namely, enforcement of statutory and constitutional rights.
10. The Commission observes that in cases involving matrimonial disputes and maintenance proceedings, courts have recognized the necessity of limited financial disclosure to enable fair adjudication of the rights and liabilities of the parties. At the same time, such disclosure cannot be extended to complete personal financial documents or detailed records, as the RTI Act does not permit blanket disclosure of third-party personal information.
11. In this case, the Appellant is the legally wedded husband of Smt. Mamta Sharma, whose information has been sought. The Commission also takes note of the fact that such financial information may be critical in matters related to matrimonial disputes, maintenance claims under Section 125 CrPC, where financial transparency is necessary for adjudication of rights and liabilities. This will help the court concerned to decide the matter expeditiously based on CIC/CCITM/A/2024/631139 Page 4 of 7 truthful record. It is an established principle in such proceedings that a spouse is entitled to know the financial status of the other.
12. 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."
13. 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 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 CIC/CCITM/A/2024/631139 Page 5 of 7 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.
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."
14. In light of the above observations, the Respondent needs to ascertain that the Appellant is the legally wedded husband of Smt. Mamta Sharma and there is a maintenance case/matrimonial case pending before the Court. For CIC/CCITM/A/2024/631139 Page 6 of 7 said purpose, the Appellant is directed to submit complete relevant documents related to his matrimonial dispute/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 available in their record. 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.
15. The FAA to ensure compliance of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) Sd/-
(S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, O/o the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range - 27(2), Tower No. 6, Room No. 415, Vashi Railway Station Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400 703 CIC/CCITM/A/2024/631139 Page 7 of 7 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)