ORDER

1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), O/o. the Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Hospet. The appellant seeking information is as under:-

“Please inform the details that how much income showing in this PAN card by the Reenakumari for the year 2012-13, 2013 -2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-18 and 2018-19, etc.”

2. As the CPIO had not provided the requested information, the appellant filed the first appeal dated 19.05.2019 requesting that the information should be provided to him. The first appellate authority was ordered on 20.06.2019 and disposed of his first appeal. He filed a second appeal u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission on the ground that information has not been provided to him and requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.

Hearing:

3. The appellant attended the hearing through video-conferencing. The respondent, Shri Prasanna, CPIO attended the hearing through video-conferencing.

4. The appellant and the respondent are agreed for adjudication of both the cases together, as the subject-matter is identical in nature.

5. The appellant submitted that no information has been provided to him by the respondent on his RTI application dated 24.04.2019. The appellant stated that he is the legally wedded husband of Ms. Reenakumari and he is entitled to get this information.

6. The respondent referred to the CPIO reply dated 30.04.2019 and stated that the information sought by the appellant is personal information of third party, which cannot be disclosed under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The respondent submitted that the FAA vide its order dated 20.06.2019 had also upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

Decision:

7. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the information sought by the appellant regarding the details of income shown by her wife in her Income Tax Returns, etc. is personal information of third party, which cannot be disclosed under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The Commission referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commission & ors. SLP(C) No. 27734 of 2012 dated 03/10/2012 wherein it was held as under:

14. “The details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are "personal information" which stand exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, unless involves a larger public interest and the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information."

However, making a distinction with the said judgment, the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of M.P. in the matter of Smt. Sunita Jain vs. Pawan Kumar Jain and others W.A. No. 168/2015 and Smt. Sunita Jain vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and others W.A. No. 170/2015 dated 15.05.2018 had in a matter where the information seeker had sought the salary details of her husband from the employer held as under:

"While dealing with the Section 8(1)(j) of the Act, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the appellant and the respondent No.1 are husband and wife and as a wife she is entitled to know what remuneration the respondent No.1 is getting. Present case is distinguishable from the case of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande (supra) and therefore the law laid down by their Lordships in the case of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande (supra) are not applicable in the present case. In view of the foregoing discussion, we allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the Writ Court in W.P. No.341/2008. Similarly, the W.A. No.170/2015 is also allowed and the impugned order passed in W.P. No.1647/2008 is set aside."

8. Moreover, the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) in the matter of Rajesh R