CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2009/000788
Dated, the 15th January, 2010.
Appellant : Shri Sanjay S. Shanbhag
Respondents : Central Excise & Service Tax Department
This matter was heard through videoconferencing (VC) on
07.01.2010 pursuant to Commission’s notice dated 03.12.2009.
Appellant and the CPIO, Shri C.S. Krishnayya were present at NIC VC
facilities at Karwar and Mangalore respectively. Commission conducted
the hearing from its New Delhi office.
2. Appellant’s RTI-application dated 11.02.2009 contained the
following queries:-
“While I have been fighting against the allegations of ….
Corruption in your department, please supply me the proof of
following two things as pointed out on the order of Dy. Commr.
Of Central Excise, Udupi (relevant copy of the order portion
enclosed herewith) [sic].
I. Who and when had your person visited my premises and
requested me to pay service-tax?
II. How you had caught me and how you had persuaded me to
pay service-tax? Kindly supply me the hardcore proof.”
3. CPIO, in his communication dated 25.03.2009, gave the following
reply to the appellant:-
“I. From the adjudication file, it is seen that, Mr.A.L.Idurkar,
then Superintendent of Central Excise Range, Karwar (Now
working in Karwar Customs) was in charge of Karwar Range
where Mr.Sanjay Shanbagh has taken the R.C. It is
ascertained from Mr.A.L. Idurkar, that he has not visited
the premises of Mr.Sanjay Shanbagh of Karwar, but he has
prevailed upon him and persuaded him over telephone to
pay the Service Tax amount, accordingly he has paid
Service Tax.
AT-15012010-07.doc
Page 1 of 2
II. As already explained above, Mr.A.L.Idurkar, Superintendent,
persuaded Mr.Sanjay Shanbagh, over phone to pay the
Service Tax. Accordingly, he has paid the Service Tax. No
other evidences are available in the file.
The word ‘caught’ does not mean physically ‘caught’. It
has been used only to mean that it has come to the
knowledge of the Department that he has not paid ST and
hence he was persuaded over phone to pay.”
4. I find the information disclosed to the appellant fully meets the
query appellant had incorporated in his RTI-application. As such, there
shall be no further obligation cast on the respondents to disclose any
more information.
5. Appeal closed.
6. Copy of this direction be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
AT-15012010-07.doc
Page 2 of 2