Central Information Commission
Anirudh Sharma vs Directorate Genenral Of Gst ... on 19 May, 2026
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File Nos: CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493
Anirudh Sharma .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Dy. Director, Directorate
General of Goods and Service
Tax Intelligence, C-62,
Sarojini Marg, C-Scheme,
Jaipur-302001
CPIO,
Directorate General of GST
Intelligence, C-62, Sarojini
Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001
CPIO,
Directorate General of GST
Intelligence, Delhi Zonal
Unit, MTNL Building, 4th
Floor, Sector-6, Dwarka,
Near Manipal Hospital,
New Delhi-110075 .... ितवादीगण /Respondents
Date of Hearing : 19.05.2026
Date of Decision : 19.05.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 1 of 27
The above-mentioned Second Appeals are clubbed together as the Appellant
as well as the Respondent are common, subject-matter is similar in nature and
hence are being disposed of through a common order.
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 26.08.2024
CPIO replied on : 26.09.2024
First appeal filed on : 03.10.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 03.11.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 26.08.2024 (online) seeking the following information:
"Request for Action and Copies of Documents regarding Seizure of Personal Belongings by DGGI Udaipur I am writing to bring to your attention that I have been consistently sending emails 48 and registered posts since April 13 2024 to the DGGI Udaipur office regarding the seizure of my personal belongings including cash, mobile phones, laptops, and documents. Despite my numerous requests I have not received any receipt or documentation for the seized items nor have I been provided with any information on the actions taken I request that you take immediate action in this matter and provide me with copies of the following documents Receipt for the seized items Documents related to the seizure and investigation Actions taken against the responsible officials for not providing receipts and causing harassment I would appreciate it if you could expedite this matter and provide me with the requested documents at the earliest"
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 2 of 272. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 26.09.2024 stating as under:
"In this regard, point-wise reply in respect of information sought in respect to DGGI, JZU is as under:
Point No. (i): Receipt of seized items- Original copy of Panchnama with GST INS-02 were provided to Shri Anirudh Sharma on 13-04-2024 under his acknowledgement after completion of Panchnama Proceedings. The same were again provided to Shri Anirudh Sharma alongwith SCN dated 03-08-2024.
Point No. (ii): Documents related to seizure and investigation: out of seized documents, scanned copies of relied upon documents were provided along with SCN dated 03.08.2024 and the non-relied upon documents are under scrutiny in connection with another case.
Point No. (iii): Action taken against the responsible officials for not providing receipts and causing harassment: In this regard the desired information cannot be provided as per the provisions of section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005."
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 03.10.2024. The FAA's order is not on record.
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 02.09.2024 CPIO replied on : 26.09.2024 First appeal filed on : 03.10.2024 First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 03.11.2024 Information sought:
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 3 of 275. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.09.2024 (online) seeking the following information:
"I am writing to express my disappointment and frustration with the lack of progress in recovering my seized items including cash, mobile laptops, and other valuable documents by the DGGI Udaipur staff. Despite sending 48 emails between April 13, 2024, and August 26, 2024, there been no significant action taken to resolve my case The details of my case are as follows Seized items Cash, mobile phones, laptops, and other valuable documents Correspondence 48 emails sent to DGGI Udaipur staff between April 13, 2024, and August 26, 2024 I request you to take immediate action against the DGGI Udaipur staff for their inaction and negligence in resolving my case I would appreciate could provide me with a detailed report on the action taken against the responsible officials. kindly given copies of action"
6. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 26.09.2024 stating as under:
"In this regard, the desired information cannot be provided as per the provisions of section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005."
7. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 03.10.2024. The FAA order is not on record.
8. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 28.08.2024 CPIO replied on : 26.09.2024 First appeal filed on : 03.10.2024 First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 03.11.2024
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 4 of 27Information sought:
9. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.08.2024 (online) seeking the following information:
"Copies of policies and guidelines issued by DGGI to prevent harassment of taxpayers and traders Details of training programs conducted by DGGI for its officers to sensitize them on easing doing business and preventing harassment Information on the number of complaints received by DGGI regarding harassment and the action taken on each complaint Copies of circulars and notifications issued by DGGI to implement the Ease of Doing Business initiative Details of the mechanism established by DGGI to address grievances and complaints related to harassment Total number of businesses visited by DGGI officials in the last 2 years.
Number of cases where DGGI officials have been accused of harassment Details of training programs conducted by DGGI to sensitize officials on ease of doing business Copies of policies and guidelines issued by DGGI to prevent harassment.
Number of complaints received by DGGI regarding corruption.
Action taken on complaints of corruption Number of businesses closed/sutter downed due to DGGI actions.
Reasons for closure/sutter downing of businesses Details of notices issued by DGGI for non-compliance Number of cases where DGGI officials have been penalized for misconduct.
Details of internal investigations conducted by DGGI on harassment and corruption CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 5 of 27
Copies of circulars and notifications issued by DGGI on ease of doing business.
Number of businesses that have been granted relief by DGGI Details of the mechanism established by DGGI to address grievances.
Number of grievances received by DGGI Action taken on grievances Details of the whistleblower policy of DGGI Number of whistleblower complaints received by DGGI Action taken on whistleblower complaints Details of the annual report of DGGI on ease of doing business and harassment"
10. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 26.09.2024 stating as under:
"In this regard, it is pertinent to mention here that the sought for information is voluminous and direction for disclosure would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authorities. Hence, the information sought cannot be provided in terms of Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, 2005."
11. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 03.10.2024. The FAA's order is not on record.
12. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 6 of 27
Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sharma, Assistant Director/CPIO; Shri Ravi Kumar, Sr. Intelligence Officer; and Shri Santosh Kumar Meena, Sr. Intelligence Officer, appeared through video conference.
13. Proof of having service of copies of Second Appeals on Respondent while filing the same in are 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.
14. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had already provided replied to the above RTI Applications within the stipulated time as per the provisions of the RTI Act. Besides, the Respondent submitted that a detailed written submission was filed by CPIO explaining relevant facts of the case and requested the Commission to place the same on record, copy of the same was marked to the Appellant. The contents of the written submissions are reproduced as under:
"1. Brief Conspectus facts of the Instant Matter: Before presenting the version of the respondent CPIO in the instant appeal filed by the Appellant before the Hon'ble Central Information Commission (CIC), it is important to provide the crucial facts and background of the matter. This will help in understanding the context that led to the filing of various RTI applications by the Appellant and the present appeal before the Hon'ble CIC. A brief conspectus of the facts of the instant matter is set out below in paragraphs 1.1 to 1.21 1.1 That DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit had booked an GST evasion case against M/s. Shree Solar venture private limited of which Appellant's , Shri Anirudha Sharma is one of the Directors.
1.2 That during the Course of the investigation, a Search Operation under the provisions of CGST Act 2017 was carried out by the officers of DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit at the Declared Business premises of Appellant's Company, M/s. Shree Solar venture private limited on 12/13-04-2024. Search proceedings was carried out in the presence of two independent witnesses and incriminating documents and electronic devices were seized from the premises of Appellant's Company for further investigation by the officers.
1.3 A Panchnama dated 12/13-04-2024 of the search proceedings along with list of seized documents and electronic devices in Prescribed Form INS-02 were drawn at the business premises of the Appellant's Company and on conclusion CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 7 of 27
of the search proceedings, Copy of Panchnama and details of seized documents and electronic devices were handed over to the Appellant and Appellant's signed on each page of the Panchnama and form INS-02 duly acknowledging the correctness of the Panchnama proceedings and list of documents and electronic devices seized by the officers from its premises.
1.4 That during the search proceedings, one another firm in the name of M/s. Vivaan Enterprises operating from the premises of the appellants company was also found and the said firm was owned and operated by Appellant's brother. Upon verification, some serious discrepancies in their inventory records were noticed. The investigation against appellant's company M/s. Shree Solar Ventures Private Limited was concluded by issuing a demand cum show cause notice on 03-08-2024 and the discrepancies noticed in respect of the another firm M/s. Vivaan Enterprises were communicated to jurisdictional commissionerate for further necessary action vide letter dated 23-04-2025.
1.5 That after search proceedings, Appellants and his Family members has started filing various complaints against the officers of DGGI by sending multiple e-mails to higher authorities of DGGI office, Finance minister office, Chief Minister and to other various government agencies/organization such as CBI, Police etc. and mainly alleged that the officers of DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit has taken various item from its business premises without giving any receipt for the same and sought releasing of seized items.
1.6 The appellant has also filed multiple CPGRAM and RTI applications alleging their-in the illegal seizure and demanding of action's against the officials for not releasing the goods/items seized by the DGGI officials. Through RTI applications filed by Appellant, he has also sought information on the action taken by the department in respect of the complaints of illegal seizure sent by him through his multiple emails.
1.7 That Appellant's in his some of the complaints has also alleged that the DGGI officers has also seized various documents such as Cash, various mobile phones , Laptop , his personal belongings etc. without giving any formal receipt of the seizure of the said items. Further in his different complaints, the appellants has alleged different facts regarding the seized items from his premises, in some complains he claimed that the officers has seized 12 mobiles, in some complains he has claimed that the number as 3 mobile phones were seized and in some complaints he has claimed the officers has seized, 3 laptop's and in some complaints he has claimed that officers has seized 2 laptop's and in some he has claimed that the officers has seized 1 laptop. Similarly, in different RTI application different figure was claimed by the appellant for example in RTI application No. DGCEI/R/T/24/00064 dated 14.10.2024, appellant claimed that DGGI officials have seized two laptop, CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 8 of 27
HDD, Two Pen drive and some files whereas in RTI applications application No. DGCEI/R/E/24/00150/1 dated 08.11.2024 and DGCEI/R/T/24/00076 dated 11.11.2024, he claimed 6 mobiles, 3 laptops, 2 hard disks, etc. were seized by DGGI officials unlawfully. Similarly in respect of other documents and items, he has claimed different factual figures in his different complaints, CPGRAMS and different RTI Applications 1.8 That acting on the various complaints alleging therein the illegal seizure filed by Shri Anirudha Sharma against the officers of DGGI Udaipur regional unit, a departmental enquiry was ordered by competent authority. The complaints of the Appellant were duly investigated twice, once by Assistant director of DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit and again by Additional Director, DGGI Jaipur Zonal Unit .That in effort to provide an opportunity to the Appellant's to substantiate his allegations and to ensure transparency, the enquiry officers has issued multiple letters dated 03-12-2024, 06-12-2024, 11-12-2024, 21-01- 2025, 29-01-2025 and 03-02-2025 for personal hearing opportunities, calling upon the appellants to present his version and evidences in support of his allegation. However, despite multiple opportunities granted to the appellants, appellants wilfully choose not to appear before the authorities and refrained from participating in enquiry process 1.9 That on the other hand, officers involve in the search proceedings and investigation of the case has produced multiple evidences in support of their defence falsifying the appellant complaints. On conclusion of the enquiry, the complains of the appellants were found baseless, fictious, malafide and intended to frustrate the due process of law so as to draw a favourable conclusion in the investigation relating to the GST evasion and eventually escape from their tax liability. Enquiry report dated 23-12-2024 of Assistant Director of DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit and Enquiry report dated 24-02-2025 of Additional director of DGGI Jaipur Zonal Unit has already been shared with the appellant through the reply of writ petitions and complaints filed by appellant in Hon'ble High Court and ACJM Court Bikaner.
1.10 That the Demand-Cum -Show cause Notice dated 03-08-2025 issued by DGGI were adjudicated by the adjudicating authority on 31-12-2025 and adjudicating authority passed an order dated 31-12-2024 upholding the demand raised by DGGI. That during the pendency of show cause notice and after adjudication of Show Cause Notice by adjudicating authority, appellants has also filed multiple writ petition's/contempt petition (16877/2024, contempt Petition No. 272/2025 and 6395/2025) in Hon'ble high court Jodhpur alleging therein the illegal seizure by the DGGI officials and lack of opportunity of hearing provided by adjudicating authority. Relief sought by Appellant's in all the writ petitions were dismissed by Hon'ble High court. Hon'ble High court CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 9 of 27
under para 13 of its order dated 21-08-2025 passed while dismissing writ petition No 6395/2025 has observed following:
13. In view of the above, we are of considered opinion that petition is grossly misconceived and wholly devoids of merits. Contention of the petitioner that it was granted four weeks time to file documents on 10ᵗʰ December 2024 is grossly misleading and appears to be an attempt to cause delay or stall recovery of amount.
1.11 That the DGGI has not seized any documents, devices and things other than those which are reflected in form INS-02 enclosed with Panchnama dated 12/13-04-2024 & the copy of Panchnama along with form INS-02 were also provided to appellant at the time of conclusion of the search proceedings and receipt of same were also acknowledged by Shri Anirudha Sharma. However, appellant regularly sent emails for returning of the documents/devices/things/cash which were never seized by the officers of the DGGI. Further, scanned copies of relied upon documents to Show cause Notice dated 03-08-2024 were already provided to the appellant vide email dated 04-
08-2024 along with the said SCN and same were sent from email id [email protected] to appellants registered e-mail id with GSTN [email protected] and [email protected] and further the Relied Upon Documents to SCN were also uploaded on GST portal along with DRC-01 on 04-08-2025 and the Panchnama and seizure memo were the relied upon documents to the SCN dated 03-08-2024.
1.12 That DGGI vide its letter dated 19-11-2024 also replied to the appellants letter 15-07-2024 (received on 13-11-2024) wherein it was clearly mentioned about the documents/devices which were seized by the DGGI and documents/devices which were not seized by the officers of the DGGI and it was also communicated that those devices/documents which were part of relied upon documents to the SCN dated 03-08-2025, could not be returned in original at that stage and the documents/devices which were not relied upon for issuing SCN might be required for the investigation being carried out against M/s. Vivaan Enterprises. That vide the said letter appellant, was also informed that back up of any electronic devices, photocopy of documents may be sought from the DGGI office, if required by them.
1.13 That DGGI Udaipur issued a letter dated 09-06-2025 to the appellant, wherein he was informed to collect the Non-RUD's as these documents were not required in any further investigation. Further, a letter dated 13-06-2025 was also issued to the appellant, wherein he has been again informed about the list of documents/devices which were seized and the list of documents/devices/things/ cash which were not seized by the DGGI officers but claimed by appellant, which is unsubstantiated and appear to be an CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 10 of 27afterthought, possibly to escape from their tax liabilities. Further vide the said letter, the appellant has been again requested to collect the documents in person from the DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit during working hours, with prior intimation, however, till 29-08-2025, neither the appellant nor any authorized representative of the appellant appeared to collect the back up of electronic devices and photo copy/scanned copy of seized documents.
1.14 That the appellant has sent emails dated 23-08-2025 and 25-08-2025 wherein he has sought the back up of seized electronic devices and scanned copy and photocopy of Seized documents. That DGGI, Udaipur vide its letter dated 25-08-2025, again informed the appellant that the DGGI, Udaipur through its earlier correspondences, in the matter, had already requested the appellant to collect the Non-RUDs (in original) and complete photocopies and cloned images of the seized digital data and physical records which were seized and duly recorded in the Form INS-02, enclosed with the Panchnama dated April 12-13/4/2024. The appellant was also informed that no representative from M/s. Shreesolar Ventures Private Limited had visited DGGI office to collect the materials till 25-08-2025. Therefore, vide the said letter appellant was once again requested to collect the non-RUDs (originals), photocopies, soft copies, and backup of the seized electronic devices at earliest by visiting in person from the DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit during office hours on any working day, with prior intimation of their visit to DGGI office.
1.15 That two letters dated 26-08-2025, submitted by the appellant vide email dated 26-08-2025 informing therein that he has authorized his father, Shri Jugal Kishore Sharma to collect the photo copy/scanned copy of seized documents and back up of electronic devices and his father Shri Jugal Kishore Sharma also informed vide email dated 26-08-2025 that he is planning to visit DGGI Jaipur office for collection of the photo copy/scanned copy of seized documents and back up of electronic devices on 28-08-2025 and 29-08-2025. By return email dated 26-08-2025, he was informed by the DGGI, Udaipur that their seized documents are lying in DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit therefore he was advised to visit the DGGI, Udaipur Regional Unit office.
1.16 That Shri Jugal Kishore Sharma along with Shri Anil Chaubisa with aforesaid authorization letter visited the DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit office to collect the photocopy/scanned copy of seized documents and back up of electronic devices on 29-08-2025. Accordingly, for providing the back up of seized electronic devices, photo copy/scanned copy of seized documents, the officers presented the non-RUD documents files/registers etc. in original and a hard disc containing back-up of all the data that was retrieved from the seized devices as mentioned in the INS-02 enclosed with the Panchnama dated 12/13-04-2024 drawn at the principal place of business of M/s. Shree Solar Ventures Private Limited located at Rani Bazar, Bikaner. Then, Sh. Jugal CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 11 of 27Kishore Sharma asked the officers whether the said documents or devices were seized under the video recording. The officers informed him that the audio- video recording of the search proceedings was made mandatory after BNSS Act came into force i.e. 01st July 2024 and as the search was conducted on 12th & 13th April 2024, therefore, the search proceedings were not recorded under audio-video recordings. Officers further informed him, however, the recordings of the search proceedings got recorded in the DVR installed in the premises till the time it was seized officers informed him that the back-up of the said recordings was also being provided in the hard disk, in which back-up of all the data of seized devices i.e. Mobile Phones and Laptop is there. Sh. Jugal Kishore Sharma stated that he can-not accept any document or devices or its back up data if the same were not seized under video recordings. Thereafter, Sh. Jugal Kishore Sharma left the office of the DGGI, Udaipur Regional Unit office at around 13:18 Hrs and refused to sign the Panchnama without collecting the aforesaid documents. That the entire process was carried out in presence of independent Panchas and audio video recording.
1.17 Thereafter, appellants vide its e-mail dated 31-08-2025 has again alleged that the DGGI Officers has denied to provide photo copy/scanned copy, back up of electronic devices to his authorized representative on his visit to 29-08- 2025 to DGGI Udaipur office. In reply of appellants e-mail dated 31-08-2025, this office vide its letter dated 02-09-2025 informed the appellant's about the whole incident as detailed in above Para and further informed the appellant's that deliberate denial of accepting the copy of requisite documents and back up of electronic devices seized by this office reflects the Malafide intention behind the various e-mails, correspondences and complaints made by him and purpose of such complaints does not appears to resolve any genuine grievances but reflects an attempt to avoid from their tax liabilities by making false and baseless allegation against the departmental officers.
1.18 That appellant's preferred an appeal before the appellate authority under the provisions of CGST Act 2017 against the order dated 31-12-2024 passed by adjudicating authority in respect of the Demand cum show cause notice dated 03-08-2024 issued by DGGI wherein one of the contention of the appellants in its defence was that they are not able to properly defence their case before the appellate authority due to non-furnishing the copies of the seized records by DGGI office. The appellate authority decided the appeal of the appellants vide order dated 31-12-2025 wherein it was held that ample opportunities were provided to the appellant to collect the documents/records, however, the appellant unnecessary raised dispute on search proceedings which was not required at all. Therefore, the allegations of the appellant that the seized documents/records were not provided is devoid of merit and rejected the said contention of the appellants.
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 12 of 271.19 That subsequent to the order passed by appellate authority, the appellant again sent an legal notice via e-mail dated 16-02-2026 wherein he has stated that against the aforesaid order passed by appellate authority, they are planning to file an appeal before second appellate authority i.e GSTAT and demanded to release of the seized documents by DGGI and also demanded to release the documents/devices and items which were never seized by DGGI office. In reply of the said legal Notice, DGGI Udaipur vide its letter dated 14- 03-2026 again informed appellants that DGGI office has only seized the documents/device which were duly reflected in Seizure Memo ( Form INS-02) attached to the Panchnama dated 12/13/-04-2024 and nothing other than those documents/devices which were not part of the Panchnama dated 12/13/-04-2024 has ever seized by the DGGI office. Further, vide the said letter the Appellant were again requested to collect their sized documents/devices by visiting DGGI Office on any working day by giving prior intimation to DGGI office. However, till date Appellants has not come to collect their seized documents/devices.
1.20 That the Appellant's has also filed an criminal complaint's against the DGGI officials under section 156(3) of the code of criminal procedure read with section 175 of BNSS Act before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.4 ,Bikaner on 21-08-2024. In the said complain, the appellants has alleged that during the search the search proceedings, DGGI officials misbehaved with him and their staff and taken various goods, documents, electronic devices, cash without giving any receipt of the same. The said complain is presently pending adjudication before the learned trial court as on date no cognizance has been taken against the DGGI officials.
1.21 Based on the enquiry officer's findings, the High Court's observations, the appellate authority's order under the CGST provisions, and the correspondence between the DGGI and the appellant, it is evident that the appellant's allegations are unfounded, baseless, and lack merit. The allegations appear to be made with mala fide intent to harass and demoralize the officers in the performance of their official duties. Accordingly, the various complaints, RTI applications, and CPGRAMS submissions filed by the appellant do not reflect any genuine grievance or to seek information in public interest but seem to have been used as tools to obstruct official work and harass the officers.
2. Reply of the Respondent CPIO in the Instant Appeal filed in respect of His RTI Application bearing registration Number DGCEI/R/E/24/00048 dated 02.09.2024 2.1 Appellant's vide his RTI Application bearing regd. no. DGCEI/R/E/24/00048 dated 02.09.2024 has sought following information from CPIO, DGGI, JZU.
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 13 of 27I am writing to express my disappointment and frustration with the lack of progress in recovering my seized items including cash, mobile phones, laptops, and other valuable documents by the DGGI Udaipur staff. Despite sending 48 emails between April 13, 2024, and August 26, 2024, there has been no significant action taken to resolve my case The details of my case are as follows Seized items Cash, mobile phones, laptops, and other valuable documents Correspondence 48 emails sent to DGGI Udaipur staff between April 13, 2024, and August 26, 2024 I request you to take immediate action against the DGGI Udaipur staff for their inaction and negligence in resolving my case I would appreciate it if you could provide me with a detailed report on the action taken against the responsible officials and kindly given the copies of action 2.2 Reply by the CPIO: In response to the aforesaid information sought by the Appellant, the Respondent CPIO, DGGI, JZU vide F. No. DGGI/INV/MISC/415/2022/5377 dated 25.09.2024 replied that the desired information cannot be provided as per the provisions of section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005 2.3 Appeal filed before First Appellate Authority: Being aggrieved, the appellant filed his First Appeal No. DGCEI/A/E/24/00034 dated 03.10.2024 and appealed as under:-
"To, Shri Ashutosh First Appellate Authority Additional Director, DGGI Jaipur Office Subject: Appeal Regarding Non-Compliance with RTI Act - Request for Action and Penalty Imposition Respected Sir, I am writing to file an appeal against the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), DGGI Jaipur, for failing to provide the requested information under RTI No. DGCEI/R/T/24/00048. Despite my submission and multiple reminders, no effort has been made to comply with the RTI Act's timeline and obligation, especially concerning the recovery of data and true copies of seized items including cash, mobile phones, laptops, and important documents by the DGGI Udaipur staff. Details: Seized items:
Cash, mobile phones, laptops, valuable documents. Correspondence: 48 emails sent between April 13, 2024, and August 26, 2024. RTI non- compliance: Information and updates have not been provided within the statutory timeframe. I respectfully request the following actions: Impose a penalty of ₹250 per day on the officer responsible for the delay in compliance, as per RTI Act provisions. Immediate instruction to the concerned officials to furnish all pending information related to my seized items and the status of my case. A detailed report on the action CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 14 of 27
taken against the responsible CPIO and officials for their negligence and inaction should penalize 250/-Per day with 25000/-, ensuring accountability in the administration. The unjustifiable delay in providing the requested information not only violates the RTI Act, but also reflects poorly on the duty of accountability and transparency in the system. I seek your prompt intervention in addressing this matter and ensuring that the concerned officials are held accountable for their dereliction of duty. Thank you for your attention. Yours sincerely, Aniruddh Sharma Resident of C-16, Shiv Valley, Bikaner, Rajasthan 9414416705."
2.4 Personal Hearing Opportunity by First Appellate authority: The appellant has been given three opportunities of Personal Hearing (PH) vide letters F. No. DGGI/INV/Misc/334/2024-Gr-B/5601 dated 18.10.2024 and another three vide letter F. No. DGGI/INV/Misc/197/2024-Gr-B/5640 dated 28.10.2024 w.r.t above appeal. After giving personal hearing, the appellant requested for PH through virtual mode, in response, PH in virtual mode through Google meet was scheduled on 11.11.2024 at 12:30 PM vide letter dated 08.11.2024 and the same was communicated to the appellant through Email dated 08.11.2024. Thereafter the link for the PH through virtual mode was shared through Email to Shri anirudh Sharma on 11.11.2024 on 12.05 PM and also informed through call by the PA to Appellate Authority, on which he refused to attend the Virtual PH. Despite many opportunities of PH in person or through virtual mode, neither the appellant nor any authorized person on his behalf has appeared on the said PH.
2.5 Finding by First Appellate Authority:
• The appellant have preferred the appeal on the ground that appellant has not received the reply of his RTI Application within 30 days but the reply made by the CPIO, DGGI, Jaipur Zonal Unit was in the available time-frame of 30 days as the RTI application dated 02.09.2024 received in DGGI office on 02.09.2024 and the CPIO replied to the applicant vide letter dated 25.09.2024.
• That the despite numerous opportunities of personal Hearing or hearing on virtual mode, the appellant did not appeared and it is also observed that the appellant has got the reply as per his RTI application. • As per the Reply of the CPIO the details of any internal investigation against officers as requested cannot be provided in the light of Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
2.6 Grounds of the second appeal filed by Appellant before CIC and ground wise Reply of CPIO :
(i) Reply of Respondent CPIO to the 1ˢᵗ Ground of second appeal of Appellant i.e "Non-Compliance of the RTI Act":
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 15 of 27
• (i) The appellant Ground that the respondent CPIO has failed to provide the requested information within the stipulated time of 30 days as mandated by section 7(1) of the RTI Act is factually incorrect, the respondent CPIO vide letter dated 25-09-2024 has replied to the RTI application dated 02-09-2024 within the stipulated time frame of 30 days.
• (ii) Further as the internal investigation against the officers by the department in respect of the various complaints filed by the Appellant was under progress at the time of RTI Application filed by appellant therefore disclosing the status of ongoing enquiry before its conclusion (Concluded on 24-02-2025) could have hampered the investigation, more specially by keeping in the mind the hostile approach adopted by the appellant in the instant matter as can be seen from the notesheet of the GST evasion investigation file (Wherein it is mentioned that the appellant's father threatened the officer of dire consequences if investigation against the appellant firm was not dropped by officer by stating that he has lot of power and many influential people including IAS, IPS and IRS are his friends.
• (iii) Further apart from the above RTI application, Multiple frivolous, repetitive and vexatious RTI Application's were filed by the appellant which obstructed the work of the Government office and 10 appeal have been filed against the reply of the CPIO on the same ground that the reply of the RTI was not provided in the time limit as per RTI Act, 2017, wherein all the reply from the CPIO was well within the time of 30 days from the receipt of the application. The details/GIST of the such 5 RTI Applications and its reply vide CPIO, wherein the appeal has been filed by the appellant and details of the order passed by First Appellate authority on first appeal is tabulated below:
RTI application details Reply of CPIO
RTI application Point No. (i): Contact Details of DGGI
No.DGCEI/R/T/24/00065/1 dated Offices: The Phone number and email
18.10.2024 address of DGGI Jaipur Zonal Unit and
Udaipur Regional Unit is furnished below:
1.Contact Details of DGGI Offices: Kindly (a)DGGI Jaipur Zonal Unit: Phone
provide the correct phone numbers and Number:01412225581,
email addresses of DGGI Udaipur, Jaipur, (b)DGGI Udaipur Regional Unit: Phone
and Delhi offices. The contact Number: 02943558390,
information currently available or
provided has not been functional or Point No. (ii): The desired information responsive. Please issue updated contact does not pertains to this office. details with the correct information.
Point No. (iii): Nodal officer for Grievance CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 16 of 27
2. Efforts for Trade Enhancement: Kindly redressal of complaints in respect of DGGI provide details of the initiatives and Jaipur is Shri Ashutosh, Additional relentless efforts undertaken by DGGI, Director, DGGI, Jaipur.
New Delhi, for trade enhancement during the financial years 2023-24 and the Point No. (iv): Seizure of Goods Without current financial year 2024-25. I seek an Receipt : It is informed that the list of official document or report containing documents/devices which were seized this information. from the premises of the taxpayer is mentioned in the INS-02 to the
3. Abuse of Power and Corruption by Panchnama dated 12/13-04-2024 and DGGI Officers: Please provide receipt of original copy of the same were information on whether there are duly acknowledged by Shri Aniruddh trainers or officials appointed to prevent Sharma. Further again a copy of the INS- and address the misuse of power, 02 along with Panchnama dated 12/13- corruption, and misconduct by DGGI 04-2024 were provided to the taxpayer as officers in dealing with traders. Kindly RUD-13 of the SCN share detailed information, including DGGI/INT/INTL/306/2023 Gr-M-O/o DD- names and designations of such officials. DGGI-RU-Udaipur/I/2277402/2024 dated 03-08-2024. There is no seizure of any
4. Seizure of Goods Without Receipt: cash amount, Pen drives and HDD from During a recent inspection at my business your premises as mentioned in the RTI premises, a significant amount of cash, Application. Only few files/registers, One laptops, hard disks, pen drives, and files Lenovo Laptop, 3 mobile phones & one were taken without a receipt by DGGI DVR as detailed in INS-02 to the officers. Please provide an official record Panchnama dated 12/13-04-2024 were of the data and copies of all documents seized from your premises in the presence related to this seizure, along with of two independent witnesses. The said compensation of ₹10 lakhs for damages documents/devices are part of RUD's to caused. Kindly issue a formal receipt for SCN and one other investigation is being the items seized. carried out by this office therefore same were not returned to you. Further it is not
5. Threats to Traders and Interference in made clear by you that how the carrying Business: Kindly provide a copy of the out investigation of GST evasion by the statements from over 400 traders, officers under the provision of including myself, who have been CGST/SGST/IGST Act has caused you the threatened under the guise of damages.
interrogation by DGGI Udaipur and Jaipur officers. This behaviour has led to the shutdown of my business. Please furnish Point No. (v): Threats to Traders and details regarding the names and current Interference in Business: Summons were postings of the responsible officers, issued to taxpayer's 10 clients/customers including an official report regarding the to cross verify the deposition made by the business losses caused to me. authorized representative of the taxpayer in his statement and in compliance of the CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 17 of 276. Compensation for Business Loss: I said summons, your 9 customers/clients have incurred approximately ₹2 crores in rendered their statements voluntarily on losses over the past five months due to their own free will without any threat, the actions of DGGI officers. I seek the coercion or inducement. Copy of all the name and designation of the officer statements recorded during the course of responsible for these losses, so I may the investigation of your clients including claim the amount as compensation. yourself has been already provided to you as RUD 09 to RUD 11, RUD-15 and RUD-
18 of the SCN DGGI/INT/INTL/306/2023-
Gr-M-O/o DD DGGI-RU-
Udaipur/I/2277402/2024 dated 03-08- 2024. Further it is informed that official have carried out the investigation of GST evasion while discharging their official duties under the provision of CGST/SGST/IGST Act and the prescribed guidelines.
Point No. (vi): Compensation for business loss: Prima facie as per the SCN there appears a loss of Rs. 6.15 Crores to government exchequer on account of GST evasion by the taxpayer. However it is not known to this office that how the taxpayer is projecting Rs. 2 crores loss due to the Investigation carried out by the officers while discharging their official functions under the CGST/SGST/IGST ACT.
1. Details of the officials responsible for Point No. (i): Details of the officials business loss: Provide the names, responsible for business Loss: The designations, and current postings of statement rendered by your clients officials from DGGI Jaipur and Udaipur during the course of the investigation who interacted with over 400 of my were already provided to you as RUD 09 business clients regular dealers now the to RUD-12 of the SCN faraway my dealer and lost of payment DGGI/INT/INTL/306/2023-Gr-M-O/o DD and business, leading to the loss of my DGGI-RU-Udaipur/I/2277402/2024 dated business. provide me photocopy of all 03-08-2024. The names and designation conversation and correspondence of my of the officers who investigated the case clients. Cas are available on the Summon and Statements which were already provided
2. Compensation for losses exceeding ₹2 to you as RUD's to the aforesaid SCN. crore: Provide details on the process for Further it is not made clear by you that recovering losses, including interest, from how the carrying out investigation of GST the officials responsible for harassment. evasion by the officers under the CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 18 of 27Seizure of Cash 2.59, Two laptops, HDD, provision of CGST/SGST/IGST Act has led two pen drives and some of files that to the loss of your business.
would like reimbursement to cover my
loss due to harassments from personnel Point No. (ii): Compensation for losses
payment. exceeding Rs. 2 Crore : Carrying out
investigation of GST evasion by the
3. Written statements from my clients: officers under the provisions of GST Act
Provide shadow copies of statements or can not be categorized under the
affidavits taken from my regular clients category of the harassment. Further it is
by DGGI Jaipur and Udaipur during this not made clear by you that how the
period. carrying out investigation of GST evasion
by the officers under the provision of
4. Order No. 01/2023-24 dated CGST/SGST/IGST Act has caused you
30.03.2024: Provide shadow copies of losses. Further it is informed that nothing
actions taken as per Order No. 01/2023- other than the documents/devices
24, with reference to emails sent by me mentioned under INS-02 to the
between 13.04.2024 and 06.10.2024. Panchnama dated 12/13-04-2024 were seized from your premises. There is no
5. Details of investigation and seizure of cash 2.59, Two pen drives and resolution: Provide details of any HDD from your premises as mentioned in investigations and actions taken in the RTI Application. Only few response to my complaints, including files/registers, One Lenovo Laptop, 3 internal memos and communication mobile phones & one DVR as detailed in records during from 20.02.2023 and INS-02 to the Panchnama dated 12/13- 30.08.2024. 04-2024 were seized from your premises in the presence of two independent witnesses. The said documents/devices are part of RUD's to SCN and one other investigation pertaining to the another firms being carried out by this office therefore same are not returned to you.
Point No. (iii): Written Statements from your clients : Copy of the statements of your clients recorded during the course of the investigation were already provided to you as RUD 09 to RUD-12 of the SCN DGGI/INT/INTL/306/2023 Gr-M-O/o DD-
DGGI-RU-Udaipur/I/2277402/2024 dated 03-08-2024.
Point No. (iv): Order No. 01/2023-24 dated 30.03.2024: The information sought under point 4 is not clear for CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 19 of 27proper reply.
Point No. (v): Details of Investigation and Resolution: No evidence regarding the allegation made against the officers was ever shared with this office by Shri Anirudh Sharma hence no action is warranted.
RTI application No. Point No. 1 & 2:- The sought for DGCEI/R/E/24/00150/1 dated information cannot be provided under 08.11.2024 and DGCEI/R/T/24/00076 Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act,2005. dated 11.11.2024 Point No. 3, 4 & 8:- The sought for
1.Records of Absenteeism: a. information cannot be provided under Photocopies of the movement register for Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act,2005. the period 01.11.2024 to 07.11.2024 for FAA and CPIO officials (Ashutosh and Point No. 5 & 6:- it is pertinent to Abhishek Narayan Sinha both are absent mention here that Information has in office hours without pre information to already been supplied to Shri Anirudh just con) at the DGGI Jaipur Office. b. Sharma in reply to his previous RTI Details of any disciplinary action, application No. DGCEI/R/T/24/00064 including the show cause notice issued dated 14.10.2024 and RTI application No. for absence on the specified date, copies DGCEI/R/T/24/00065 dated 15.10.2024, of their response, and any ban on salary and further repetitive RTI's are withdrawal. hampering the work of this office.
2. Action Taken on Communication: Point No. 7:- No Reply needed. Provide copies of the action taken on my email issued on 06.11.2024 regarding the absence of the officials and its subsequent effect on my appeal. for FAA and CPIO officials (Ashutosh and Abhishek Narayan Sinha both are fail and non competent for job) at the DGGI Jaipur Office at my presence time 11.00 am to 4.00 pm Dated 06-11-2024 at DGGI Jaipur office will full absent from duties without information at offices.
Establishment register for this day with movement register photocopy provided.
3. Digital Forensic Laboratory Documentation: a. Copies of all forensic lab records from 01 July 2017 to CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 20 of 2707.11.2024, including establishment records, expense logs, and skilled personnel rosters. b. Monthly MIS (PPT and Excel) evaluation reports from July 2017 to 07.11.2024 showing accountability and assessments.
4. Details of Third-Party Service Utilization: Records relating to Cint Technology New Delhi for services provided to DGGI, including dates, purpose, and justification for third-party involvement despite the department's forensic labs.
5.Incident During Search/Raid on 12.04.2024 - 13.04.2024: a. Information on the out of seizure by Cint Technology and GST official of Udaipur and Jaipur more than 16 no. they are unlawfully captures of devices (6mobiles, 3 laptops, 2 hard disks, etc.) from my merely relate company personal my father laptop , including a list of officials involved and authorization details. b. Details of data handling and actions related to the alleged sale of seized data in the market.
c. Name, contact information, and establishment details of the responsible officer, along with provisions for compensation to recover the estimated loss of INR 2 crores.
6..DGGI phone no. at Delhi, Gurugram and Jaipur not responsive, as per Displayed website. Pl provided correct phone no. whatapp and email so concept of Ease to doing business ethics establish and grievance resolve your circular 30-03- 2024.
RTI Application .DGCEI/R/E/24/00147 Point 1, 3 & 4:- it is pertinent to mention dated 30.10.2024 here that Information has already been supplied to Shri Anirudh Sharma in reply to his previous RTI application No. CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 21 of 2701. डीजीजीआई उदयपुर का नाम पता एंव DGCEI/R/T/24/00064 dated 14.10.2024 and RTI application No. ईमेल फोन नं. वेबसाइट पर कह पर द श!त DGCEI/R/T/24/00065 dated 15.10.2024, नह ं है अवैध %ांच / चौक( संचा लत है and further repetitive RTI's are )थापना से अबतक क( काय!वाह एंव hampering the work of this office.
Point No. 2:- The information sought is अ+धकार / कम!चार का ,यौरा तथा इस हेतु already available in the public domain i.e. दोषी अ+धकार का नाम एंव पद एंव महाशय www.dggi.gov.in. क( यो.यता के द)तावेज क( सुलभ पा0य छाया 2तया उपल,ध कराव3 ।
02. डीजीजीआई जयपुर, डीजीजीआई गु67ाम एंव डीजीजीआई है ड8वाटर नई 9द:ल म3 उपल,ध फोन नं ईमेल ए;ेस केवल 9दखावे के लए है फोन नं. कह पर काम नह ं करते है , न ह अ=यावेदना पर आपके )तर से काय!वाह कर सू+चत ?कया जाता है य9द हाँ तो सAम अ+धकार का नाम पता एंव उसक( यो.यता, Bवभागीय जाँच और महाशय क( उपलि,ध का ,यौरा 9दया जावे ।
03. मेरे साथ Bवगत फरवर , 2024 से सीजीएसट बीकानेर एंव डीजीजीआई उदयपुर Eवारा समानाFतर जाँच चल रह है अकेAण चल रहा है , रे ड के नाम पर मेरे पHरसर म3 लूटमार हुई है मेरे 2त9दन Iयापार ठKप हो गया है Iयापार करने से 7ाहको को रोका गया है इससे मुझे दो करोड़ क( डूबत और नुकसान हुआ है इसक( भरपाई डीजीजीआई Bवभाग Eवारा क( जानी है मुझे इस हेतु अ+धकार का नाम पता एंव मोबाइल नं 9दया जावे िजससे महाशय से सNपक! कर वसूल क( काय!वाह कर सकँू ।
04. Bवभाग के सक!ु लर 9दनांक 30.03.2024 के CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 22 of 27OबFद ु संPया 1 तथा OबFद ु सं 2 ए से 8यू 2 व 3 क( पालना के Qम म3 मेरे )तर से सम)त काय!वाह पूण! है परFतु Bवभाग से 13.04.2024 से आ9दनांक तक मैने 125 ई मेल 50 रिज)टड! पR जार कर 9दये है HरKलाई, +7वेFस Hर;ेसल एंव अ=यावेदनाओं के 2न)तारण हे तु न तो Bवभाग ने कोई ईमेल, लेटर अथवा फोन कॉल कर है । Bवभाग के सAम अ+धकार कहते है ?क कोट! चले जाओ तो कृपया Bवभाग के सक!ु लर 9दनांक 30.03.2024 के OबFद ु संPया 1 तथा OबFद ु सं 2 ए से 8यू 2 व 3 काय!वाह 2तयाँ दे व3 ।
In the above 5 RTI's, appellant has filed 5 appeals before First appellate authority on the grounds of "No response within the time limit and Refused access to Information Requested".
The First appellate authority has dismissed all the appeals and ordered as below-
I have gone through the records and facts available on the file and it is observed that the reply made by the CPIO, DGGI, Jaipur Zonal Unit was in the available time-frame of 30 days as detailed in below table-
Sr. No. RTI application No. RTI filing date Date of the Reply by the CPIO
1. DGCEI/R/T/24/00065/1 18.10.2024 11.11.2024
2. DGCEI/R/T/24/00064 14.10.2024 11.11.2024
3. DGCEI/R/E/24/00150/1 08.11.2024 19.11.2024
4. DGCEI/R/T/24/00076 11.11.2024 19.11.2024
5. DGCEI/R/E/24/00147 30.10.2024 19.11.2024 I find that in the Virtual PH, No additional submission was made by the appellant.
In view of the discussions and findings recorded above, I find that CPIO has responded to RTI's within time and so appeals are dismissed CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 23 of 27(ii) Reply of the Respondent CPIO to the 2nd Ground of second appeal of Appellant i.e "Failure of the First Appellate Authority":
(i) The appellant ground that The FAA did not properly address appellant's first appeal and no actionable steps were taken to ensure the information was released is factually incorrect, as may be seen from the order of the FAA, The FAA has provided multiple opportunities of P.H or P.H on virtual mode to the appellant, however the appellant choose not to appear before FAA.
(ii) Further as seen from the second appeal application filed by Appellant, it is clear that second appeal is filed by the appellant before the Hon'ble CIC on 03-
11-2024 and under supporting documents copy of first appellate decision is attached as supporting documents, Whereas in the instant RTI application the Order was passed by the First Appellate Authority on 22-11-2024. From this it appear that the appellant has furnished some other order of the First Appellate Authority passed by FAA in respect of any other RTI application of the Appellant and Appellant projecting it as decision passed by the first appellate authority in reply of its RTI application number DGCEI/R/T/24/00048 dated 02.09.2024
(iii) Reply of the Respondent CPIO to the 3ʳᵈ and 4ᵗʰ Ground of second appeal of Appellant i.e "Inordinate Delay" and "Lack of Transparency" : The appellant third ground of appeal is that the delay in releasing information has resulted in significant personal and business losses, thereby violating appellants right to timely information and the 4th ground is that The failure to release information is a breach of the principles of transparency and accountability in governance. The said grounds of appeal are also factually incorrect as can be seen from Brief Conspectus facts of the Instant Matter.
These grounds are misconceived. As detailed in the conspectus of facts above, all available and non-exempt information relating to the Appellant's grievances has been repeatedly provided to him through various replies to RTI applications, court proceedings, and other official correspondence. The Appellant has been given repeated opportunities to collect photocopies, scanned copies, and backups of seized electronic data, which he or his authorised representative have wilfully refused to accept. The allegations of delay and lack of transparency are therefore without any basis.
3. Prayer:
In view of the facts and submissions made hereinabove, it is most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Central Information Commission may be pleased to:
a) Dismiss the Second Appeal filed by the Appellant as being devoid of any merit and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 24 of 27
b) Uphold the replies given by the CPIO and the order passed by the First Appellate Authority; and
c) Pass any other order(s) as the Hon'ble Commission may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
Decision:
15. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent officials and perusal of the records, observes that the Respondents have furnished detailed written submissions explaining the background of the matter and the replies provided to the RTI applications.
The Commission further notes that replies were furnished by the concerned CPIOs within the stipulated time under the provisions of the RTI Act. The Respondents have also explained that information available on record had already been supplied to the Appellant through replies to the RTI applications, copies of relied upon documents supplied during adjudication proceedings and other official communications.
16. The Commission also notes the contention of the Respondents that several RTI applications filed by the Appellant were repetitive and substantially related to grievances arising out of investigation proceedings initiated under the CGST Act against the Appellant's firm. The Respondents have submitted that certain information sought by the Appellant pertained to ongoing investigation/enquiry proceedings and was therefore denied under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. In respect of the information sought in File No. CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493, the Commission observes that the queries were voluminous, generic and largely in the nature of seeking explanations. Moreover, the Respondent during the hearing submitted that period of information was not specified by the Appellant, hence, the query becomes generic.
17. The Commission further observes that the Appellant has not availed the opportunities of personal hearing granted by the First Appellate Authority in several matters despite repeated notices. The FAA orders and the written submissions of the Respondents indicate that reasonable efforts were also made to address the grievances raised by the Appellant.
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;
and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 25 of 2718. Upon overall consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commission is satisfied that an appropriate reply, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, has been furnished by the Respondent Public Authority in the instant matters. No mala fide denial of information or deliberate obstruction is discernible from the records. In view of the above, the Commission finds that intervention is not warranted in the matters.
The appeals are dismissed accordingly.
Sd/-
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कु मार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूच ना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) Sd/-
(S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Director, Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence, C-62, Sarojini Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur-302001 The FAA, Directorate General of GST Intelligence, C-62, Sarojini Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302001 The FAA, Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Delhi Zonal Unit, MTNL Building, 4th Floor, Sector-6, Dwarka, Near Manipal Hospital, New Delhi-110075 CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 26 of 27
CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648455; CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648475;and CIC/DGSTI/A/2024/648493 Page 27 of 27
Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)