Central Information Commission
Mr.Atul Gulati vs Cbdt on 1 October, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067
Tel: +91-11-26105682
File No.CIC/DS/A/2011/001655/RM
Appellant: Mr. Atul Gulati, New Delhi
Public Authority: Income Tax Department, Haridwar
Date of Hearing: 25.6.2012
Date of decision: 1.10.2012
Heard today, dated 25.6.2012.
Appellant is present.
The Public Authority is represented by Shri Budh Singh, ITO Ward-2
Rishikesh & CPIO, Shri R.C.Nainwal, Inspector and Shri Shamim Ahmed,
ITO Haridwar on behalf of AA (through video conferencing).
The above parties were heard and records perused.
FACTS
1
Vide RTI dated 15.10.10, the appellant had sought the following information from the date of inception of the Trust till date:
i. Copies of IT returns with all annexures filed by Shri Sai Baba Super Spirituality Hospital Trust.
ii. Copies of by-laws/rules of the IT Act in respect of obligations of a 'Trust' registered under the Societies Act. iii. Copies of applications periodically submitted by the Trust in Form No.10(G) as per rule 11AA for approval u/s 80(g) along with documents.
iv. Copies of returns filed by the Trust u/s 139(4A). v. Copies of Form III-A submitted. vi. Copies of applications submitted for registration of Charitable/religious Trusts u/s 12-A(a) of the IT Act along with annexures.
vii. Copies of periodical applications filed by the Trust. viii. Copies of Form 10 submitted by the Trust. ix. Copies of applications submitted in Form 55 by the Trust. x. Copies of Form 56 and Form 56D submitted by the Trust. xi. Details of all donations received from abroad.
2. CPIO vide letter dated 24.11.10 provided certain information to the appellant but withheld the IT returns etc as being personal information.
3. An appeal was filed on 22.12.10. The AA vide order dated 8.2.11 while agreeing with the CPIO on many points directed the CPIO to take action u/s 11 and provide third party an opportunity. The CPIO was also directed to provide the specific sub-section of Section 8(i) under which information had been denied and to provide to the appellant point-wise comments. Records do not indicate action, if any, taken by the CPIO.
4. Not satisfied with the response, he filed the present appeal.
25. In pursuance of the order of the AA, the CPIO had provided a point- wise response to the queries raided by the appellant vide their letter dt 24.2.11. A copy of this order has been submitted by the appellant, which is taken on record.
6. The crux of the issue is whether the information sought is 'personal' and hence can be denied u/s 8(i)(j) of the RTI Act as has been done by the public authority. It is the contention of the appellant that the Trust is a charitable oganisation running on public donations from within the country and abroad and hence the information sought cannot be treated as 'personal' u/s/ 8(i)(j). In his support he has referred to a judgment of Shri Shailesh Gandhi, Information Commissioner, dated Dec 14, 2009 (Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta Vs CIT), wherein it has been held that section 8(i)(j) cannot be applied where the information concerns institutions, organizations or corporates. He also cited a similar case decided by Mrs Sushma Singh, Information Commissioner, dated 22.6.11 (Shri Atul Gulati Vs JS Foreigners, MHA).
7. The CPIO submitted that they had sought the views of the third party u/s 11 of the RTI Act and as the Trust was carrying out commercial activity, the information had been withheld u/s 8(i)(j) of the RTI Act.
8. In the light of the CIC orders quoted by the appellant, the CPIO is directed to provide their comments on the same within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order. They shall also provide to the Commission a copy of their reply in response to Section 11 notice. The appellant may also make a written submission, if he so desires. The Commission will take a view on receipt of the responses from the public authority and the appellant.
9. The appellant has made a request for a copy of the response submitted by the Trust u/s 11. The CPIO is directed to examine the request of the appellant under the provisions of the RTI Act and take appropriate action.
The hearing is adjourned.
Sd/-
3(Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner 1.10.12 The Commission is in receipt of written submissions of appellant and the public authority vide their letters dt 25.7.12 and 30.7.12. The Commission has examined the contentions of both the parties. We observe as follows:
i) The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, in their judgement, WP(C) no.
5677/2011 pronounced on 18.11.11, had held "The expression 'individual' has to be and understood as 'Person' i.e. the juristic person as well as an individual". Hence it is clear that the Trust is a third party and the information sought by the appellant is of personal nature and the third party has raised objection in furnishing the same.
ii) The appellant has asked the details of all transactions of donations received from abroad by the said Trust in his query no.11. The decision of CIC in appeal no.CIC/SS/A/2011/000454 dt 22.6.11 (Shri Atul Gulati Vs Ministry of Home Affairs) has been quoted in support of his contention.
We find that the ratio of said decision is not applicable to the subject matter, as u/s 12 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Rules 2011, a duty is cast upon the beneficiaries of foreign contributions in excess of Rs 1 crore of equivalent thereto, in a financial year, to keep the summary data in public domain and Central government should also display or upload the summary data with the public through its Website.
iii) In view of above discussion, the Commission is in agreement with the decision dt 24.2.11 of the CPIO on all points raised by the appellant except point no.2.
iv) We find that the appellant has asked for copies of by laws/rules framed under the RTI Act in respect of obligations of a Trust, registered under the Societies Act, wherein CPIO has supplied copy of rules and regulations of the Trust.
v) The Commission directs the CPIO to furnish the following to the appellant within fifteen days:
a) Information as asked by the appellant in query no.2.4
b) Copy of third party objection letter received by them.
The appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy forwarded to :
Shri Atul Gulati, B - 9/6455, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi - 110 070 The Income Tax Officer & CPIO, O/o Income Tax Officer Ward - 1, Rishikesh.
The Addl.Commissioner of Income Tax & A'A, O/o Addl.Commissioner of Income Tax Range Hardwar, D-29 & 30, Industrial Area, Hardwar.
(Raghubir Singh) Deputy Registrar .10.2012 5 6