CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2008/00457
Dated, the 31st July, 2008.
Appellant : Shri P.S. Gandas
Respondents : Directorate General of Income Tax (Investigation)
This second-appeal by Shri P.S.Gandas (appellant) came up for hearing on
31.07.2008 pursuant to Commission’s hearing notice dated 02.07.2008.
Appellant was present in person, while the respondents were represented by
Mr.Ishtiyaque Ahmed, Addl. Director of Income Tax (Inv-III). Third-party
(Vinod Khatri and Harbir Khatri) was present through their representative,
Shri Raj Kumar Thakural.
2. Respondents making their submissions stated that the matter which the
appellant has brought up through his RTI-application dated 08.01.2008 has
already been decided through Commission’s decision dated 04.10.2007 in
Appeal No.CIC/AT/A/2007/00426. Respondents, therefore, stated that under
Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, the appellant cannot be allowed to bring
up this matter afresh. He also pointed out that the respondents, viz. the
Directorate General of Income Tax (Investigation) has now been exempted from
the purview of the RTI Act through Government notification dated 27.03.2008
under Section 24 read with Second Schedule of RTI Act.
3. According to the respondents, either way the appellant cannot be allowed
to bring up this matter for decision by the Commission.
4. Appellant submitted that he has brought in this case for disclosure of
information following High Court’s decision in Bhagat Singh’s case, in which
the Court had held as follows:-
“The mere existence of an investigation process cannot be a ground for
refusal of information and authority withholding information must show
satisfactory reasons as to why the release of such information would
hamper the investigation process.” “Such reasons should be germane,
and the opinion of the process being hampered should be reasonable and
based on material.”
5. Respondents pointed out that as spelt-out by the CPIO, the Bhagat Singh’s
case is not applicable in the present matter.
Page 1 of 2
6. Appellant further submitted that it was somewhat strange that the
respondents were so reluctant to disclose information about properties seized
during their search and seizure operations to an RTI-petitioner citing third-party
confidentiality, while the same respondents happily appear before media cameras
and hold forth on the seizures which they effect during raids.
7. It is noted that appellant’s submission as spelt-out in the preceding
paragraph needs to be taken due note of by the public authority.
8. However, considering the fact that the Directorate General of Income Tax
(Investigation) is now an exempt organization under the RTI Act as decided in
cases such as Jagdish Singh Saini & Ors Vs. Income Tax Department; Appeal
Nos. CIC/AT/A/2008/00324-329; Date of Decision: 14.07.2008, it is not possible
to allow disclosure of any information pertaining to such exempted organization.
9. The appeal, therefore, fails. Closed.
10. Copy of this decision be sent to the parties.
Sd/-
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
Authenticated by –
Sd/-
( D.C. SINGH )
Under Secretary & Asst. Registrar
Page 2 of 2