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, Katni seeking following information:-

1. “Certified copy of the ITR details of Smt. Savita Chanpuria (PAN AZJPC3678E) for the AYs 2015-16 to 2017-18.”

2. The CPIO responded on 26-02-2019. The appellant filed the first appeal dated 23-03-2019 which was disposed of by the first appellate authority on 12-04-2019. 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. Deepak Shukla attended the hearing through audio-video conferencing. Mr. Anil Mishra, CPIO participated in the hearing representing the respondent through audio conferencing. The written submissions are taken on record.

4. The appellant stated that Smt. Savita Chanpuria is his deserted wife and he has been paying the subsistence allowance of Rs. 12,000/- per month, therefore, he is entitled to know as to whether it is reflected in her ITR.

5. The respondent submitted that the information sought by the appellant is exempted u/Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005 and no public interest would be served in disclosure of the ITR of Smt. Savita Chanpuria. The CPIO is also not obliged to cull out the details from the ITR of the assessee which is purely personal in nature. Decision:

6. This Commission observes that the details of the income tax returns of Smt. Savita Chanpuria cannot be disclosed to the RTI applicant merely on the ground of payment of subsistence allowance. The appellant has also not established any larger public interest in disclosing her ITR. Therefore, details of the income tax returns of Smt. Savita Chanpuria being personal in nature exempted u/Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005 cannot be disclosed to the appellant. Accordingly, the CPIO cannot be expected to find out the details from the ITR of an individual assessee. This legal position has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as well as the Hon’ble High Courts of Bombay and Delhi which is being reproduced hereinafter. With regards to the applicability of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005 regarding non-disclosure of the Income Tax Returns, 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:-

“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.”

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 citi