CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
File No. CIC/LS/A/2009/00022
Appellant : Shri Vidhyadhar Kesharchand Doshi
Public Authority : Income Tax Department, Solapur
(through Shri J.M. Shaikh, Income Tax Officer)
Date of Hearing : 6.4.2009
Date of Decision : 6.4.2009
Facts
By his letter of 4.1.2008, the appellant had sought information on 24 points in
respect of the Income Tax and Wealth Tax proceedings initiated in the case of late
Chanchala Devi Chandulal Gandhi from AY 2000-01 onwards.
2. The matter was decided by Ms. N.R. Kulkarni, ITO, 2 (4), Solapur (CPIO)
vide order dated 1.2.2008 wherein she refused to disclose the information under
section 8 (1) (e) & (j) of the RTI Act.
3. On appeal, Shri S.K. Singh, Addl. CIT, Range-2, Solapur (AA), after giving
an opportunity of hearing to appellant, decided the matter vide order dated 4.4.2008,
upholding the decision of CPIO.
4. The present appeal is directed against the orders of the CPIO/AA.
5. The matter was heard on 6.4.2009. The appellant did not appear before the
Commission. The public authority is represented by the officer named above. The
main ground adduced by the appellant in his appeal is that the CPIO/AA have erred
in holding that the information available with the public authority is fiduciary in
nature and disclosure thereof has no relationship to any public activity or interest.
6. It is the submission of Shri Shaikh that late Chanchaladevi Chandulal Gandhi
expired sometime in 2000 and she left behind a will in favour of the appellant in
respect of her property. Hence, the notices were duly issued to the appellant for
proceedings under the Income Tax Act and the Wealth Tax Act. The proceedings
have now been finalised and appropriate orders passed. It is also his submission that
the appellant is particularly interested in information sought by him in point NO. 16
of his RTI application viz. obtaining certified copies of letter/notice issued to Shri
Rajender Kumar Maniklal Gandhi & Shri Shashant Prakash Khamitkar who have
alleged that late Chanchalal Devi owned property worth 100 crores. It is his say that
the IT Deptt. is holding this information in a fiduciary capacity and is exempted
under section 8 (1) (e) & (g) of the RTI Act. The appellant is not before the
Commission to contest the objections raised by Shri Shaikh to establish that
disclosure of the information sought by him would be in larger public interest.
DECISION
7. In view this of the matter, I find no infirmity in the order passed by the CPIO
and the Appellate Authority and the appeal is dismissed. It is, however, open to the
appellant to take recourse to the relevant statutes and rules framed there under to
seek copies of documents, if so advised.
Sd/-
(M.L. Sharma)
Central Information Commissioner
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