CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2010/000187
Dated, the 13 May, 2010.
th
Appellant : Shri J.H. Gandhi
Respondent : Central Excise & Customs Commissionerate
s
Matter was heard through videoconferencing (VC) on 05.05.2010 in
the presence of both parties. Appellant was present in person at NIC VC
facility at Vadodara, while the respondents ― represented by the CPIO,
Shri Hawa Singh Gajraj ― were present at the same venue. Commission
conducted the hearing from its New Delhi office.
2. Appellant’s RTIapplication dated 16.07.2009 was replied to by the
CPIO on 18.08.2009, in which, CPIO declined to disclose any of the
requested information except item no.4, in respect of which, he stated
that as per his records there were no cases of late sanction/issue of
drawback letters. The reply to this query, according to CPIO, was
therefore ‘NIL’.
3. Appellate Authority, through his order dated 09.10.2009, upheld the
firstappeal and directed the CPIO to respond to the appellant’s queries.
4. Accordingly, CPIO furnished further reply to the appellant on
13.10.2009.
5. The queries and the replies are discussed below:
CIC_AT_A_2010_000187.doc
Page 1 of 4
Query at Sl.No.1: “Ref. our following Applications for fixation of Brand
rate of Duty Drawback
a) cpc/kab/200809/114 dtd. 17th dec.2008 received by your
dept. 19.12.08.
b) cpc/kab/200910/ dt.13.4.09 received by your dept. on 17th
April 09
What are the procedures for moving Application file within the
C.Excise Dept / Authorities? and
Time taken by each Authorities / officers concerned with Name,
Qualification, and Salary with Allowances for last 10 years.”
6. As regards the firstpart (i.e. procedures), it is seen that CPIO had
provided to the appellant the procedure for dealing with applications for
fixation of brand rate of duty drawbacks in general and to specific
petitions in particular.
7. The reply given by the CPIO fully meets the query appellant has
made. There shall be no further disclosure in regard to this query.
8. As regards the secondpart of this query (i.e. timetaken by each
Authority), it is best answered by allowing the appellant to inspect the files
in which the officers handled the two cases mentioned by him in this item
of query.
9. Accordingly, it is directed that within two weeks of the receipt of this
order, on a day and time to be identified by the CPIO and intimated in
advance to the petitioner, he shall be allowed to inspect the related files,
from which he shall also be allowed to take copies of the documents he
might identify. Usual fees shall be charged.
CIC_AT_A_2010_000187.doc
Page 2 of 4
Item at Sl.No.3: “How many Pre and Post Applications for Brand Rate
Fixation are being received by C.EX. Authority than our Application
submission to you ? Out of them How many Brand Rate letters are
issued and How many are pending? Give chronological details to this
effect.”
10. The main point in this query is the chronology in which the variety
of requests appellant has mentioned were handled by the public authority.
Appellant’s point is that the officers of the public authority decided the
applications at their whims and fancies and not strictly in the order in
which they were received.
11. It is directed that the chronology of the receipt of the applications
mentioned by the appellant, the dates on which these were takenup for
processing and the dates of final orders shall be provided to him within
two weeks of the receipt of this order.
Item at Sl.No.4: “If any late Drawback letter issued by the C.Ex.
Authorities, (a) reason of it (b) interest paid by the Govt., Will it be to the
Account of the Officers concerned for late Application process? OR the
same is in to at Govt. Account?”
12. This information has been provided through CPIO’s
communications dated 18.08.2009 and 13.10.2009
Query at Sl.No.5: “What are the communications / procedures between
your dept and custom dept. after issuance of the Brand Rate letter to the
Applicant? Give details.”
13. This request has been met through response to Sl.No.1. There
shall be no further disclosure obligation.
14. Appeal disposed of with these directions.
CIC_AT_A_2010_000187.doc
Page 3 of 4
15. Copy of this direction be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
CIC_AT_A_2010_000187.doc
Page 4 of 4