692SPGoyalITOSureshKambleMumbai23 03 1
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No.308, B wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Appeal No. CIC/AT/A/2008/00692
Appellant: Shri S.P. Goyal
Public Authority: Income Tax Department
(through Shri Suresh G. Kamble,
ITO(XII)(1)(2) Mumbai (CPIO)
Date of Hearing: 23/03/2009
Date of Decision: 23/03/2009
FACTS
:-
By his letter of 23/03/2008, the Appellant had requested for the certified copy of
for Wealth Tax Return for A/Y 1988-89. In his order dated 16/04/2008, the CPIO had
mentioned that the information sought by the Appellant was not ‘information’ as defined
u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act and also that the relevant folder was not readily available.
2. On Appeal, the Appellate Authority had upheld the decision of the CPIO vide
order dated 05/05/2008.
3. Hence, the present Appeal.
4. The matter was fixed for hearing on 25/03/2009. However, Shri Kumble requests
that the matter may be taken up today itself; otherwise, he would have to stay over in
Delhi for two days. The Appellant does not have any objection to this. Hence, the matter
was taken up today.
5. It is the submission of the Appellant that the information has been wrongly denied
to him and that the CPIO has taken contradictory position in denying him the information
by way of saying that the information sought is not covered u/s 2(f) and, in the same
breath saying that the records are not traceable. The Appellant submits that if the records
are not traceable, then the CPIO should file an affidavit before this Commission. He
would also submit that he should be compensated u/s 19(8)(b) of RTI Act for denial of
information.
6. I have carefully gone through the orders of CPIO and the AA. As per my
understanding, no information can be denied to the requester only on the ground that he
supposedly is already in the possession of that information. If it were so, the Parliament
would have made a provision to this effect in section 6(1) of RTI Act. Further, it is the
submission of the Appellant that he has sought a certified copy of the Wealth Tax Return
for legal purposes which cannot be brushed aside. In response to a query raised by Shri
Kamble, it is clarified that certified copy herein would mean a copy of the Wealth Tax
692SPGoyalITOSureshKambleMumbai23 03 2
Return, as filed by the Appellant and as available in the records of the Income Tax
Department.
DECISION
7. In view of the above, the order of the CPIO and the AA is set aside. The CPIO is
hereby directed to provide a copy of Wealth Tax Return for the year 1988-89 to the
Appellant in two weeks time. It is also ordered that serious efforts may be made to trace
out the relevant documents and if the same are not traced out, then CPIO may file an
affidavit before this Commission in three weeks time, with a copy thereof to the
Appellant.
8. As the Income Tax Department is not sure whether the relevant records are
traceable or not, the issue of demand of compensation by the Appellant appears to be
premature. The documents may be provided at the rate of Rs.2/- per page and the excess
amount, if any, may be refunded to the Appellant.
(M.L. Sharma)
Central Information Commissioner
Copy to:-
Shri S.P. Goyal with reference to his No.SPG/2008/S.No.682/3522 dt.15/09/2008
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
Tele: 011 2671 73 53