CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2008/00440
Dated, the 10th September, 2008.
Appellant : Shri J.N. Ganatra
Respondents : Income Tax Department
This matter came up for hearing on 10.09.2008 pursuant to Commission’s
hearing notice dated 04.07.2008. Appellant was absent. Respondents were
represented by Shri A.D. Parmar, Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2).
2. The RTI-application dated 05.10.2007 filed by the appellant was in
respect of certain income tax refund matters about which appellant had
apparently filed a petition before the public authority as far back as 20.09.1994.
His queries to the respondents was the action taken on that letter which was
apparently about granting him the Income Tax Refund at an early date. From the
records furnished to the Commission, it is also noted that the appellant had raised
the same matter afresh through a petition to the Additional Commissioner of
Income Tax, Rajkot, which was dated 20.09.2007. The income tax authorities
had examined this petition on their file, a copy of which has been filed before the
Commission during the hearing. It was their conclusion that the information now
solicited by the appellant was fairly old and records were untraceable. They had
attempted to persuade the appellant to provide to the income tax authorities such
records and documents which he might have in his possession testifying to his
having filed the Income Tax Returns and paid the taxes in respect of which he
now requests that refunds be made to him. They did not receive any such
documents from the appellant and were, therefore, unable to process the matter
further.
3. It is not possible to draw any adverse conclusion against the decisions of
the respondents considering that the matter is not only old it relates mostly to the
settlement of the appellant’s grievance. It is the submission of the respondents
that the documents and records related to the refund case of the appellant – if
at-all there was any ─ could not be settled without documentary evidence.
This cannot be a matter under the RTI Act.
4. Commission finds no deficiency in the reasoning of the respondents.
The decision of the AA is upheld. Appeal closed.
Page 1 of 2
5. 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