CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
File No. CIC/LS/A/2009/001067
Appellant: Shri Manish Kumar
Public Authority: Income Tax Department
(through:Shri Sukhbeer Chaudhary, Addl. CIT &
Shri Jagdish Chander Pulhari)
Date of hearing - 04.03.2010
Date of Decision - 04.03.2010
Facts :-
The matter is called for hearing today dated 04.03.2010. Appellant present. The Public Authority is represented by the officers named above. It is noticed that vide RTI application dated 12.5.2009, the appellant had sought information about the progress in the TEP filed by him against one Pawan Kumar. The CPIO had responded to it vide letter dated 11.6.2009. The first appeal was decided by the AA vide order dated 6.8.2009.
2. The present appeal is directed against the above orders.
3. During the hearing, the appellant would submit that he had filed TEP way back in April 2009 and despite lapse of about 10 months, no information about the progress made therein has been provided to him. On the other hand, Shri Sukhbeer Chaudhary would submit that the matter is under investigation and no progress therein can be intimated in terms of section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
4. It is to be noted that a similar issue had come up before the Commission in File No. CIC/LS/A/2009/01014(Brij Ballab Singh –Vs- DG IT(Investigation), Lucknow) wherein the Commission had observed as follows :-
“3. Besides, it is also to be noted that blank ban on disclosure of information regarding the action taken on tax evasion complaints may not always be in the best interest of the state revenues. In fact, it may dis-enthuse the information givers as information givers are generally keen to know whether the information provided by them has been of some value to the authorities or not. Feed back in this regard would motivate the information givers to provide further informations to the authorities and thereby enable them to curb tax evasion and enhance the state revenues. Viewed thus, despite the office of DGIT(Inv) being an exempted organization, it may not always be the best policy to deny some kind of feed back to the information givers.”
The ratio of above decision aptly applies in this case. The TEP may be true or false. In any case, the appellant is entitled to know the outcome thereof. However, the full details of the investigation need not be disclosed as it would impede the process of investigation.
DECISION
5. In view of above discussion, CPIO is hereby directed to disclose the broad outcome of TEP to the appellant in 04 months time. It is, however, clarified that he need not disclose details of investigation.
Sd/-
( M.L. Sharma )
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
(K.L. Das)
Assistant Registrar
Address of parties :
1. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle 47(1) & CPIO, Room No. 426,
Mayur Bhawan, Connaught Circus,
New Delhi-110001.
2. Shri Manish Kumar,
C-6/342, Badan Street, Nr. Gole Park,
Dhuri-148024, Pb.
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
File No. CIC/LS/A/2009/001067
Appellant: Shri Manish Kumar
Public Authority: Income Tax Department
(through:Shri Sukhbeer Chaudhary, Addl. CIT &
Shri Jagdish Chander Pulhari)
Date of hearing - 04.03.2010
Date of Decision - 04.03.2010
Facts :-
The matter is called for hearing today dated 04.03.2010. Appellant present. The Public Authority is represented by the officers named above. It is noticed that vide RTI application dated 12.5.2009, the appellant had sought information about the progress in the TEP filed by him against one Pawan Kumar. The CPIO had responded to it vide letter dated 11.6.2009. The first appeal was decided by the AA vide order dated 6.8.2009.
2. The present appeal is directed against the above orders.
3. During the hearing, the appellant would submit that he had filed TEP way back in April 2009 and despite lapse of about 10 months, no information about the progress made therein has been provided to him. On the other hand, Shri Sukhbeer Chaudhary would submit that the matter is under investigation and no progress therein can be intimated in terms of section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
4. It is to be noted that a similar issue had come up before the Commission in File No. CIC/LS/A/2009/01014(Brij Ballab Singh –Vs- DG IT(Investigation), Lucknow) wherein the Commission had observed as follows :-
“3. Besides, it is also to be noted that blank ban on disclosure of information regarding the action taken on tax evasion complaints may not always be in the best interest of the state revenues. In fact, it may dis-enthuse the information givers as information givers are generally keen to know whether the information provided by them has been of some value to the authorities or not. Feed back in this regard would motivate the information givers to provide further informations to the authorities and thereby enable them to curb tax evasion and enhance the state revenues. Viewed thus, despite the office of DGIT(Inv) being an exempted organization, it may not always be the best policy to deny some kind of feed back to the information givers.”
The ratio of above decision aptly applies in this case. The TEP may be true or false. In any case, the appellant is entitled to know the outcome thereof. However, the full details of the investigation need not be disclosed as it would impede the process of investigation.
DECISION
5. In view of above discussion, CPIO is hereby directed to disclose the broad outcome of TEP to the appellant in 04 months time. It is, however, clarified that he need not disclose details of investigation.
Sd/-
( M.L. Sharma )
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
(K.L. Das)
Assistant Registrar
Address of parties :
1. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle 47(1) & CPIO, Room No. 426,
Mayur Bhawan, Connaught Circus,
New Delhi-110001.
2. Shri Manish Kumar,
C-6/342, Badan Street, Nr. Gole Park,
Dhuri-148024, Pb.
No comments:
Post a Comment