{"id":210590,"date":"2009-02-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009"},"modified":"2018-07-02T21:45:11","modified_gmt":"2018-07-02T16:15:11","slug":"shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 13 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 13 February, 2009<\/div>\n
                     CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                        Block IV, 5th Floor, Old JNU Campus\n                                  New Delhi 110067\n                          Appeal No.CIC\/AT\/A\/2008\/00523\n\n                                                           Dated February 11, 2009\n\n\nName of the Appellant:                        Pallab Bhattacharya\n                                              37, Gobinda Bose Lane\n                                              Kolkata-700 025.\n\nPublic Authority:                             Commissioner of Income Tax\n                                              Calcutta-XX\n                                              54, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road\n                                              Kolkata-700 013.\n\nDate of Hearing                               27.01.2009\n\nDate of Decision                              13.02.2009\n\n\nFACTS<\/pre>\n
 OF THE CASE:\n<\/p>\n
1.    The applicant in order to seek information under the Right to
\nInformation Act, 2005 submitted an application before the Central Public
\nInformation Officer (CPIO) of the Public Authority on 31.7.2007.                The
\ninformation so sought related to a Non-Governmental Organization called
\nUttarpara Ashraya located at 14E, Rajmohan Road, P.O. Uttarpara, Dt.
\nHooghly.       The appellant Shri Pallabh Bhattacharya asked for the following
\ninformation:\n<\/p>\n
                       (i)     Income & Expenditure account and Balance
\n                               Sheets of the Society<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                       (ii)    Summary of expenses and collection for the
\n                               years 2000-01, 2001-02 & 2002-03 and for
\n                               Financial Years 2000-01, 2001-02 & 2002-
\n                               03 submitted by the NGO along with original
\n                               application for registration.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       (iii)   Agreement with premises owner at 14E\/5,
\n                               Rajmohan Road, P.O. Uttarpara, Dt.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                               Hooghly submitted by this NGO along with
\n                               original application for registration u\/s 12AA
\n                               and exemption u\/s 80G or any time
\n                               thereafter for renewal of registration.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                          1<\/span><\/p>\n
                     (iv)     Rent receipts for use of the space where
\n                             the NGO is situated submitted for
\n                             registration u\/s 12AA and exemption u\/s
\n                             80G.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (v)      Certificates of donors for donation of
\n                             Rs.5000\/- and above for the Financial Year
\n                             2002-03 submitted for registration u\/s 12AA
\n                             and exemption u\/s 80G.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (vi)     Returns of the 9th AGM held on 1.5.2005
\n                             along with details of Executive Committee
\n                             members selected for 3 years from 2005-08
\n                             and similar details of 10th AGM.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (vii)    Return of the society informing any change
\n                             of address during the period 1996 onwards.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    (viii)   Any other records and\/or documents
\n                             submitted by the society along with their
\n                             original prayer for registration u\/s 12AA and
\n                             80G.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The applicant submitted that he needed the above information to ensure
\ntransparency and accountability and to safeguard public interest under the frame
\nof the RTI Act.\n<\/p>\n
2.     CPIO received the application on 10.8.2007. Since he was of the view
\nthat the information asked for related to a 3rd party, he, therefore, issued notice
\non 14.8.2007 as mandated under Sub-Section 2 of Section 11 of the RTI Act. to
\nM\/s Urttarpara Ahraya The Secretary of the Society, Shri Tarun Dasgupta by a
\nwritten communication dated 28.8.2007 objected to the furnishing of such
\ninformation on the ground that the disclosure was not in public interest. The
\nCPIO considered the submissions of the 3rd party and by order dated 18.9.2007
\nheld that such information lies with the Public Authority in fiduciary capacity and
\nis also private information which, if disclosed, will cause unwarranted invasion of
\nthe privacy of the 3rd party. The disclosure is in his view, therefore, covered by
\nexemption provided under Section 8(1)(e) and Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.\n<\/p>\n
3.     The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the CPIO on 13.10.2007.
\nThe First Appellate Authority observed that the information sought by the
\nappellant primarily relates to accounts, expenses and collection and certificates<\/p>\n
                                        2<\/span>
\n of donors as submitted along with application for registration under Section 12AA
\nand exemption u\/s 80G of the Income Tax Act and also matters relating to
\ntenancy. The appellant had sought the information on two categories of facts, i.e.
\none that pertains to the society as charitable trust and the other, on its tenancy.
\nThe Appellate Authority noted that —\n<\/p>\n
       (i)    Appellant had not sought information in respect of the
\n              performance or otherwise of the charitable work of the
\n              society and it appears that the petition is not made with
\n              public interest.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       (ii)   Allegations relating to tenancy are purely in personal
\n              sphere of the society and in view of the objections raised
\n              by the society as 3rd party cannot be conveyed in terms of
\n              Section 11 and Section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      The First Appellate Authority also held that the applicant has not been able
\nto satisfy him that the request is in public interest, let alone larger public interest.
\nThe Appellate Authority, therefore, confirmed the order of the CPIO and rejected
\nthe appeal by order dated 13.11.2007.\n<\/p>\n
4.     The appellant filed his 2nd appeal before this Commission on 13th
\nFebruary, 2008. In his appeal petition, he submitted that the First Appellate
\nAuthority has rejected his appeal without going through his submissions. The
\nappellant also submitted that the third party NGO could not have become a
\nregistered NGO under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act and that it was not
\neligible to get exemption under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act and that
\nthe appellant is seeking information under the RTI Act in order to get copies of
\nthe forged documents on the basis of which the registration and exemption
\nunder the Income Tax Act was granted. The appellant expressed that both the
\nCPIO and the First Appellate Authority have rejected his application and
\nappeal and have not taken into consideration his submission that for
\nregistration and enlistment of an NGO, the normal practice prevailing in any
\nGovernment office is of demanding as to whether an NGO is working on its
\nowned space at the shown address or they are on rent.\n<\/p>\n
5.     The appeal was listed to be heard on 15.10.2008 and the Commission
\nissued notices to the appellant as well as to the CPIO and the First Appellate<\/p>\n
                                         3<\/span>
\n Authority. During the course of hearing it was submitted before the Single
\nBench which heard the matter that the appeal involves disclosure of Income
\nTax related details of a NGO which is functioning in public domain, receives
\ndirect funding from the State Government and tax concessions and
\npermission from the Income Tax Department to collect donations from private
\nsources and that in that sense may qualify to be a Public Authority under the
\nRTI Act. It was also submitted on behalf of the appellant that by its very
\nnature, the NGO’s functioning cannot be behind closed doors and since they
\nare themselves in the forefront of promoting transparency, they should set
\nexamples by being transparent themselves about their sources of funding in
\ntheir functions.\n<\/p>\n
6.     Taking into account the nature of submissions, the matter was placed
\nbefore the Chief Information Commissioner for constitution of a larger Bench
\nto hear this matter. The matter was finally heard on 27th January, 2009. The
\nfollowing were present at the time of hearing:\n<\/p>\n
       Appellant<\/p>\n
       Appellant, Shri Pallabh Bhattacharya was not personally present but
\n       was represented by the S\/Shri Arijit Chakravarty and Atulan Saha<\/p>\n
       Respondent\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       1.     S\/Shri B.K. Gupta, CCIT-II<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
16.    The third party in the case who was also asked to appear before the<\/p>\n
Commission and to present their case expressed their inability to appear.\n<\/p>\n
However, they filed written submissions containing, inter-alia, as under:\n<\/p>\n
       (i)    that the appellant is in no way connected with the
\n              organization not as a member or as a well-wisher or as a
\n              donor. The appellant is residing at Kolkata-25, which is
\n              at least 30 KM from the NGO in Hooghly District. No
\n              member of their organization except Sri Somnath
\n              Mukherjee, son of their house owner has any connection
\n              with the third party;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       (ii)   The appellant is closely connected with the NGO’s house
\n              owner which is clearly reflected in a false court case filed
\n              by son of the house owner on behalf of his mother<\/p>\n
                                       4<\/span>
\n               against six members of the NGO intending to vacate the
\n              house to get higher rate of rent by depriving their disabled
\n              children where it is mentioned that the appellant is a
\n              witness. The appellant is closely connected with the
\n              house owner and has the intention to vacate the
\n              premises by ousting the NGO.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      (iv)    The proposed disclosure is not for public interest, it is
\n              only for the interest of the appellant to help in the
\n              continuous harassment procedure of the house owner
\n              intending to vacate the house, to upset the minds of the
\n              parents of mentally retarded children including the
\n              Secretary of the NGO who has a 22 years aged son of
\n              Hyperactive, Epeleptive with 100% disability and with
\n              behavior problem.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
17.   The appellant’s representatives who were present presented the
\narguments advanced by the appellant in his written submission and orally
\nduring the hearing on his behalf, which are summarized as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      (i)     Under the provisions of RTI Act, the appellant is not
\n              required to give any reasons for seeking information at
\n              any stage. However, he is seeking the information as he
\n              has doubts about the fairness and integrity of this NGO
\n              and wants this information for transparency and in public
\n              interest.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      (ii)    the third party NGO is a Public Authority and not a private
\n              entity as it is funded indirectly by Central Government by
\n              granting them exemption under Section 80G of the
\n              Income Tax Act, which enables them to raise donation in
\n              consideration of, grant of tax benefit. They are also
\n              getting direct funding from Sarva Siksha Abhiyan Project
\n              run by the State Government.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      (iii)   The information is asked for from the Income Tax
\n              Department so as to ensure that the Public Authority
\n              (Commissioner of Income Tax) did proper verification
\n              before the said third party was granted benefit under the
\n              Income Tax law.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      (iv)    that while seeking exemption under Section 12AA and
\n              80G of the Income Tax Act , the third party was not an
\n              assessee within the meaning of Section 2(7) of the
\n              Income Tax Act and as such the information provided by
\n              them cannot be held to be available with the Income Tax
\n              Authorities in fiduciary capacity. Even if it be argued that
\n              the said NGO was an assessee, the requisite
\n              documents\/information were voluntarily submitted by the<\/p>\n
                                       5<\/span>
\n               third party for obtaining financial benefit from the Central
\n              Government by way of grant of exemption u\/s 80G of the
\n              Income Tax Act.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       (v)    The documents sought by the applicant have indirect
\n              relationship to the benefit granted by the Public Authority,
\n              i.e. Central Government. These details are not part of the
\n              assessment proceedings of any entity. Since the third
\n              party has derived some benefits from the Government,
\n              the disclosure of the basis on which these have been
\n              granted becomes a matter of larger public interest and,
\n              therefore, cannot be held to be exempted u\/s 8(1)(j). In
\n              support of his arguments, the appellant cited the
\n              decisions      of    this     Commission     in     Appeal
\n              No.149\/ICPB\/2006 dated 2.11.2006 (P.S. Pattabiraman
\n              Vs. Dep’t. of Post, Tamil Nadu) and Decision
\n              No.309\/IC(A)\/2006 dated 28.9.2006 (Br. Pranesh
\n              Chaitainya Vs. DIT(E).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
18.    The respondents in the course of hearing before the Full Bench
\nsubmitted that the representative from CIT strongly objected to the appellant’s
\nsubmissions that the NGO has direct funding from the Government.              He
\nsubmitted that the department grants permission for tax concession and
\ncollection of funds on the basis of reports of the Chartered Accountant , which
\nhas nothing to do with lease agreement or rent agreement. The appellant
\ncannot ask the department to give him any copy of such agreement. He
\nsubmitted that so far as the contentions of the appellant that NGO is a public
\nauthority is concerned, the same is wrong and denied. The department is
\nready and willing to disclose all that is permissible under the Act but the NGO
\nis not a public authority.\n<\/p>\n
DECISION AND REASONS:\n<\/p>\n
19.The appellant has particularly stressed the issue that the third party NGO
\nis a Public Authority within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act as it is
\nreceiving direct funding from the State Government and deriving indirect
\nbenefits through Government of India.         In this connection, it may be
\nmentioned that the appellant has submitted the application under the Right to
\nInformation Act before the CPIO in the Income Tax Department and not
\nbefore the third party NGO. It is, therefore, not at all necessary to decide that<\/p>\n
                                       6<\/span>
\n issue in this proceeding. In fact, there is no cause of action to determine and
\ndecide as to whether the third party NGO is a public authority or not.\n<\/p>\n
20. Insofar as the response to his RTI application is concerned, the
\nrespondent appearing on behalf of Public Authority has stated that they are
\nwilling to provide information which is held by them concerning grant of
\nexemption u\/s 80G or registration u\/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act as
\nadmissible under the Act.     The issue is, therefore, remanded back to the
\nCPIO for considering the matter de-novo for issuing such information, within
\nthree weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The appeal petition stands
\ndisposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
      Announced on this the 13th day of February, 2009.          Notice of this
\ndecision be given free of cost to the parties.\n<\/p>\n
      (A.N. Tiwari)                                    (Shailesh Gandhi)\nInformation Commissioner                          Information Commissioner\n\n\n                             (Wajahat Habibullah)\n                        Chief Information Commissioner\n\n<\/pre>\n
      Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied
\nagainst application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to
\nthe CPIO of this Commission.\n<\/p>\n
(L.C. Singhi)
\n Registrar<\/p>\n
                                        7<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 13 February, 2009 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Block IV, 5th Floor, Old JNU Campus New Delhi 110067 Appeal No.CIC\/AT\/A\/2008\/00523 Dated February 11, 2009 Name of the Appellant: Pallab Bhattacharya 37, Gobinda Bose Lane Kolkata-700 025. Public Authority: Commissioner of Income Tax Calcutta-XX 54, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-210590","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nShri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 13 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 13 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-02-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-02T16:15:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 13 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-02T16:15:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2088,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009\",\"name\":\"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 13 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-02T16:15:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 13 February, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 13 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 13 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-02T16:15:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 13 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-02T16:15:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009"},"wordCount":2088,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009","name":"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 13 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-02T16:15:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-pallab-bhattacharya-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-13-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri Pallab Bhattacharya vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, … on 13 February, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/210590","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=210590"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/210590\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=210590"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=210590"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=210590"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}