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 No. 1(2), Muzaffarnagar, UP. The appellant seeking information is as under:-

“Copies of information that Balvinder Singh Chawla S/o Harjit Singh Chawla. (Address- 44, Devpuram, Gandhi colony, Muzaffarnagar.) is tax assesses.If yes, please provide copies of ITR return for assessment year 2011-12, 2012-13, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-2018 and 2018-19” .

2. As the CPIO had not provided the requested information, the appellant filed the first appeal dated 25.02.2019 requesting that the information should be provided to him. The first appellate authority was ordered on 26.03.2019 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 audio-call. The respondent, Shri Dev Kumar Yadav, CPIO attended the hearing through audio-call.

4. The respondent submitted their written submissions dated 08.01.2021 and the same has been taken on record.

5. The appellant submitted that till date no information has been provided to him by the respondent on his RTI application dated 15.12.2018. The appellant stated that the respondent has wrongly denied the information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The appellant further submitted that the respondent has also not followed the proper procedure as enumerated in Section 11 of the RTI Act. The appellant further submitted that the third party Shri Balwinder Singh has not denied in disclosure of information but has stated that some cases are pending in the court and therefore, unable to file the return. He has nowhere denied the disclosure of information.

6. The appellant, during the hearing, kept on insisting that information should be provided to him.

7. The respondent reiterated the reply given by the CPIO and FAA vide letters dated 17.01.2019 and 26.03.2019 and submitted that the information sought by the appellant is personal information of third party, which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Further, the appellant has not disclosed any larger public interest in order to get the information.

Decision:

8. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the information sought by the appellant in his RTI application is personal information of third party which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) and 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. In this regard, 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.”

In this context, the decision of the Commission in Milap Choraria v. CBDT CIC/AT/A/2008/000628 dated 15.06.2009 can be cited wherein it had been held as under:

“15. From the above discussion, it would appear that the Income Tax Returns have been rightly held to be ‘personal information’ exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of section 8(1) of RTI Act by the CPIO and the Appellate Authority; and the appellant herein has not been able to establish that a larger public interest would be served by disclosure of this information.”

The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the decision of Naresh Kumar Tr