Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.76 seconds)Section 11 in The Right to Information Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 4 in The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 [Entire Act]
Section 8 in The Right to Information Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
Shri.Subhash Chandra Agrawal vs Ministry Of Communications And ... on 27 August, 2013
The above view has also been upheld by Hon.
Commission in its previous decisions of Mr. Subhash
Chandra Agrawal vs. Ministry of Communications and Mr.
Rajeev Chandrashekhar vs. Ministry of Communications.
Therefore, it is prayed that exemption under section 8(1)(c)
of RTI Act 2005 may be granted.
Mr.Rajeev Chandrasekhar vs Ministry Of Communications And ... on 8 November, 2012
The above view has also been upheld by Hon.
Commission in its previous decisions of Mr. Subhash
Chandra Agrawal vs. Ministry of Communications and Mr.
Rajeev Chandrashekhar vs. Ministry of Communications.
Therefore, it is prayed that exemption under section 8(1)(c)
of RTI Act 2005 may be granted.
Sri G.V.N. Sreedhar Raju,, Hyderabad vs Department Of Income Tax on 30 October, 2014
The audited revenue figures in the profit and loss
accounts submitted by the Telecom Companies and that
are taken as base figure for verifying the AGR to calculate
the revenue share payable by the licensee contains
information of a third party that is commercially sensitive
in nature. A Show cause cum demand notice is being
raised if there is any shortfall calculated on the basis of
this information, The Hon. Commission in its earlier
decision in appeal no. CIC/BS/A/2015/001490/11759
(Mr. Sreedhar Rao N G vs. Department of Income Tax) in a
case akin to this has held that information relating to
income tax matters of an assessee cannot be disclosed to
third party unless the CPIO is satisfied that larger public
interest justified the disclosure of such information. It is
also respectfully brought to the notice of Hon. Commission
that department has submitted all its demand notices in
form of Action Taken Notes to the CAG with all the
relevant details, who in turn have forwarded it to esteemed
Public Accounts Committee for their examination. Both
the Constitutional authorities are examining the report
sent by DoT. The justification given by the appellant does
not establish any public interest at large being served by
revealing such information to appellant. Therefore, it is
prayed to grant exemption under section 8(1)(d) of RTI Act,
2005.
1