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. 52(1), New Delhi seeking following information:-

“IT Returns of Miss Deepanti Sadh from 2014 to 2019.”

2. The CPIO responded on 03-04-2019. The appellant filed the first appeal dated 23-04-2019 which was disposed of by the first appellate authority on 15-05- 2019. Thereafter, he filed a second appeal u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission requesting to take appropriate legal action against the CPIO u/Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 and also to direct him to provide the sought for information.

Hearing:

3. The appellant, Mr. Rishant Sadh attended the hearing through audio conferencing. Ms. Anupam Juneja, CPIO participated in the hearing representing the respondent through audio conferencing. The written submissions are taken on record.

4. The appellant limited his submissions on supplying the gross income of his wife Ms. Deepanti Sadh from 2014 to 2019 so that he could defend his matrimonial case.

5. The respondent submitted that the appellant is seeking third party information about the income tax returns of his wife, Ms. Deepanti Sadh which is personal in nature and therefore, they have claimed exemption u/Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Decision:

6. In the present case, the issue to be decided is whether the appellant claiming to be the legally wedded husband of Ms. Deepanti Sadh is entitled to seek details of her income tax returns. In this regard, it is apt to mention the decision dated 01- 07-2009 of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) 803/2009 titled as Vijay Prakash v. UOI & others wherein it has been clarified that in a private dispute between husband and wife, the basic protection afforded by virtue of the exemption from disclosure enacted under Section 8(1)(j) cannot be lifted or disturbed unless the petitioner is able to justify how such disclosure would be in ‘public interest’. In the matter at hand, the appellant has not succeeded in establishing that the information sought is for larger public purpose.

7. Since filing of the Income Tax Returns by an individual with the Income Tax Department is not a public activity and rather it is in the nature of an obligation which a citizen owes to the State viz. to pay his taxes, this information cannot be disclosed to the appellant in the absence of any larger public interest relying on the legal principle enunciated in the judgment dated 11-06-2015 rendered by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 8753 of 2013 titled as Shailesh Gandhi v. The Central Information Commission, wherein, it has been observed as follows:-

“16…The Petitioner possibly being aware of the said position has therefore sought to contend that filing of the Income Tax Returns is a public activity. I am afraid the said contention is thoroughly misconceived as filing of Income Tax Returns can be no stretch of imagination be said to be a public activity, but is an obligation which a citizen owes to the State viz. to pay his taxes and since the said information is held by the Income Tax Department in a fiduciary capacity, the same cannot be directed to be revealed unless the pre-requisites for the same are satisfied.”

8. With regards to the applicability of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005 regarding non-disclosure of the Income Tax Returns of third party, this Commission refers to the judgment dated 03-10-2012 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP(C) No. 27734 of 2012 titled as Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commission & ors., wherein, it has been held as under:-

“12. The petitioner herein sought for copies of all memos, show cause notices and censure/punishment awarded to the third respondent from his employer and also details viz. movable and immovable properties and also the details of his investments, lending and borrowing from Banks and other financial institution