Central Information Commission
R. K. Jain vs Custom Excise & Service Tax Appellate ... on 18 December, 2020
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/CESAT/A/2019/116226
R K Jain ...अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
The CPIO ... ितवादी /Respondent
O/o. the Customs Excise & Service & Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell
West Block No. 2, R K Puram, New Delhi-
110066
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 08-11-2018 FA : 21-12-2018 SA : 08-04-2019
CPIO : 03-12-2018 FAO : 25-01-2019 Hearing : 10-12-2020
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 Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The appellant seeking information on seven points, including, inter-alia:-
(i) "Please provide the copies of the disposal figures of the CESTAT Members during from 1-1-2017 till date of providing information;
(ii) Please provide the file Nos. in which the details/statement for disposal of appeals by the CESTAT members is dealt with for the period from 1-1-2017 till date. Please also intimate the number of notesheets and correspondence pages contained in each file, etc."
2. As the CPIO had not provided the requested information, the appellant filed the first appeal dated 21.12.2018 requesting that the information should be provided Page 1 of 3 to him. The first appellate authority was ordered on 25.01.2019 and disposed of his first appeal. He filed 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. It was informed to the Commission that the appellant was expired and his son through his e-mail dated 05.12.2020 had stated that the case should be decided on merits. The respondent, Shri Rajendra Prasad, CPIO attended the hearing through audio-call.
4. The respondent submitted that vide their letters dated 03.12.2018 and 25.01.2019, complete point-wise reply/information, as per the documents available on record has been provided to the appellant. The respondent stated that no other information is available on record except as provided to the appellant. The replies were seen during the hearing, which was found to be satisfactory.
Decision:
5. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and after perusal of records, observes that the information as available on records has been provided to the appellant on his RTI application dated 08.11.2018. The respondent has collected the information from different branches and has provided to the appellant. The Commission further noted that the appellant in his second appeal has contested that the FAA has wrongly rejected the application under Section 8(1)(b) of the RTI Act. The Commission observed that the FAA had wrongly invoked Section 8(1)(b) of the RTI Act. He is directed to be cautious in future and ensure that proper replies should be given to the applicants. No further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.
6. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.Page 2 of 3
7. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
नीरज कु मार गु ा) Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरज ा सूचना आयु ) Information Commissioner (सू दनांक / Date 10-12-2020 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स$ािपत ित) S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा), Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक), (011-26105682) Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO O/o. the Customs Excise & Service & Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell West Block No. 2, R K Puram, New Delhi-110066
2. Shri R K Jain Page 3 of 3