Central Information Commission
Nileshkumar Muljibhai Kothari vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cca) , ... on 16 September, 2021
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
के ीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग ,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीयअपीलसं या/Second Appeal No.CIC/CCITA/A/2020/661699
Mr. Nileshkumar Muljibhai Kothari ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO ... ितवादी/Respondent
O/o. the Pr. Chief Commissioner of
Income Tax, Room No. 47, Ground
Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Ashram
Road, Ahmedabad, Gujarat-380009
CPIO
O/o. the Chief Commissioner for
Income Tax, Income Tax
Department, Aayakar Bhawan,
Rajkot, Gujarat
CPIO
O/o. the Pr. Commissioner of
Income Tax-3, Income Tax
Department, Aayakar Bhawan,
Rajkot, Gujarat
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:-
RTI : 23-11-2019 FA : 23-12-2019 SA : 28-01-2020
CPIO : 05-12-2019 FAO : 23-01-2020 Hearing: 13-09-2021
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO)O/o. the Pr. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat.The appellant seeking informationis including inter-are is as under:-
"Kindly provide TRUE COPIES of: Page 1 of 6
a) "My complaints;
b) Departmental Enquiry, Investigation &/or Disciplinary Proceedings;
c) Explanation called for from these ITO/AOs;
d) Enquiring/Investigating Officers' noting/responses on ITO/AOs' explanations;
e) Enquiring/Investigating Officers' recommendations & Action Taken Reports;
f) Data Analysis & Forensic Audits of all their past Assessments as requested in my complaints;
g) Results of Competency Test conducted on these ITOs to ascertain that they are occupationally and professionally fit for their job as ITO/AOs;
h) Final Actions taken against these ITO/AOs;
i) All the communications arising out of and pertaining to my abovementioned complaints; etc."
2. As the CPIO had not provided the requested information, the appellant filed the first appeal dated 23-12-2019 requesting that the information should be provided to him. The first appellate authority upheld CPIO's reply and disposed the appeal vide order dated 23-01-2020. He hasfiled a second appeal u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission on the ground that information has not been provided to him and requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.
Hearing:
3. The appellant attended the hearing throughaudio-call. The respondent, Shri V Hariharsundar, CPIO/ITO (HQ 1, Rajkoat) along with M D Patel attended the hearing through video conferencing.
4. The respondent submitted their written submissions dated 01.09.2021 and the same has been taken on record.
5. The appellant reiterated the contents of his RTI Application and submitted that complete and correct information has not been provided to him by the respondent on his RTI application dated 23.11.2019.He further submitted that his RTI Application is divided into three parts, therefore there are three CPIOs involved and responsible to give reply to the queries sought in the RTI Application. However, none of the CPIO has provided relevant information and neither took recourse of the relevant sections under which the information sought has been denied. He submitted that the information sought at point no. 9 of the RTI Application has been denied by the respondent by quoting case-laws which are not even relevant to the instant matter. He contended that irrelevant Page 2 of 6 documents has been provided by the respondent which are not even related to the information sought. On being queried by the Commission as to whether the information sought at point no. 8 of the RTI Application is related to his own case, the appellant replied in affirmative and further submitted that the larger public interest is also involved in seeking such information. He further contended that information sought at point no.3 of the RTI Application has also not been provided.
6. Shri V Hariharsundar submitted that at point no. 3, the appellant has sought his own documents which are not supposed to be provided by the respondent as per the provisions of the RTI Act. On being queried by the Commission as to what reply has been provided w.r.t the information sought at point no. 8 of the RTI Application, Shri V Hariharsundar informed that the same does not pertains to their office but admitted that the RTI Application has not been transferred to the concerned department for providing reply to point no. 8. That the copy of written submission has been provided to the appellant, however the appellant contested that the same has not been received by him.
Decision:
7. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the appellant has sought information regarding complaints filed by him against Shri Vinodkumar Parmar, ITO; Shri K M Chhatrala, ITO & Shri Nalinkant J Acharya, ITO with the Chief CIT, Rajkoat- True copies of documents related to Enquiry, Investigation and/ or Disciplinary Proceedings of the Department in these cases and other related queries. The Commission observes that the concerned CPIO, O/o Pr. CCIT, Ahmedabad has transferred the RTI Application to the concerned CPIO, O/o Pr. CCIT, Rajkoat w.r.t the information sought at point nos. 1 to 8 of the RTI Application. The Commission observes that since the information sought at point no. 9 pertains to the O/o Pr. CCIT, Ahemdabad, therefore they have provided reply vide letter dated 06.12.2019 vide which they have denied the information sought by merely quoting few judgments of the Commission without giving its relevance in the instant matter. The concerned CPIO, O/o Pr. CCIT, Rajkoat has provided reply to the information sought at point nos. 1 to 8 of the RTI Application vide letter dated 07.01.2020 and their written submissions dated 01.09.2021 is also on record. The concerned FAA has further provided a detailed speaking order w.r.t the points raised by the appellant in the first appeal. The Commission observes that the appellant has raised an issue w.r.t the reply provided on three points i.e. point nos. 3, 8 & 9 of the RTI Application. Since the appellant is seeking copies of his own letters and all Page 3 of 6 communications which the respondent's office may have received at point no. 3 of the RTI Application, therefore the CPIO is not expected to provide such information whichbelieve to be in the possession ofthe appellantand hence the same cannot be provided to the appellant. The Commission observes that at point no. 8 of the RTI Application, the appellant is seeking the certified copies of the report of the High Pitched Assessment Committee forwarded toPr.CIT, via CCIT, Rajkot from ITO - PG & TPS, O/o Pr. CCIT, Gujarat,Ahmedabad. The concerned CPIO,O/o Pr. CCIT, Rajkoat has provided reply to the above said point vide letter dated 26.12.2020 as mentioned in their written submissions stating that the finding of the local committee report on High Pitch Assessment case of the appellant has already been made available to him and his case is not covered under the purview of the said committee. In this regard, the Commission is of the opinion that if the case of the appellant as per deliberations of the committee is not covered under its purview, the extracts of such deliberation of committee, if any related to his case, should be provided to the appellant. The Commission observes that the reply provided w.r.t point no. 9 of the RTI Application seems to be inappropriate as the respondent has denied the information sought by quoting few judgments without giving proper explanation as to how these judgments are relevant in denying such information to the appellant.
8. In view of the above, the Commission deems it fit to direct the concerned CPIO, O/o Pr. CCIT, Ahmedabad to provide a revised reply to the appellant w.r.t point no. 8 of the RTI Application as the said committee has been constituted under O/o Pr. CCIT, Ahmedabad only, therefore the requisite information sought at point no. 8 should be provided by the concerned CPIO, O/o Pr. CCIT, Ahmedabad. The Commission further directs the CPIO, O/o Pr. CCIT, Ahmedabad to provide a revised reply to the appellant w.r.t point no. 9 of the RTI Application vide which only a broad action taken on the complaint of the appellant as exists on record should be provided to the appellant without disclosing the internal processing/ observations/ /details of investigation and third party personal information, if any within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Meanwhile the concerned CPIO, O/o Pr. CCIT, Rajkoat is directed to provide a copy of written submission to the appellant through speed post as the appellant did not receive the same within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
9. Notwithstanding above, w.r.t other points of the RTI Application, the respondent has given information wherever required and also made full/partial Page 4 of 6
10. denial of information as per their available records and as per the provisions of the RTI Act and the same is in order and being upheld by the Commission.
11. Moreover, the Commission observes that the answering respondent seems to be lacking with the facts of the case as he could not be able to give a cogent reply to the queries of the Commission and the verbal submissions of the answering respondent is found to be contradictory with their written submissions. Therefore, the Commission issued a warning to Shri V Hariharsundar, O/o Pr. CCIT, Rajkoat to come prepared in future while appearing before the Commission and cautions him to be more careful in future while dealing with the matters related to the RTI Act.
12. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
13. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
नीरजकु मारगु ा)
Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरजकु ा
सूचनाआयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक / Date : 13-09-2021
Authenticated true copy
(अिभ मािणतस#यािपत ित)
S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा ),
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक),
(011-26105682)
Page 5 of 6
Addresses of the parties:
1. CPIO
O/o. the Pr. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Room No. 47, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhawan,
Ashram Road, Ahmedabad, Gujarat-380009
2. CPIO
O/o. the Chief Commissioner for Income Tax,
Income Tax Department, Aayakar Bhawan,
Rajkot, Gujarat
3. CPIO
O/o. the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3,
Income Tax Department, Aayakar Bhawan,
Rajkot, Gujarat
4. Mr. Nileshkumar Muljibhai Kothari
Page 6 of 6