Back
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Vinod Kumar Tiwari, Information Commissioner
D Dhaya Devadas – Appellant
Versus
CPIO, Income Tax Officer (HQ) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. rti timelines and procedural history (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. appellant seeks departmental remarks on delay condonation (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. cpio denies rti for non-citizen and repetition (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. second rti seeks factual reports post-cbdt rejection (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. cpio provides cbdt orders, faa upholds (Para 17 , 18) |
| 6. hearing notes repetitive filings by appellant (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 7. respondent justifies non-disclosure citing cic precedents (Para 23) |
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 16.11.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:
“Sub: 1. Director [OT & WT] CBDT has informed during the hearing held on 07.06.2023 based on our request to condone the delay in filing of our Income Tax Return on 08.01.2021 under Sec.119/[2][b] of Income Tax Act and the said Director has informed us that the Income Tax Department has given some negative remarks against us.
2. The Deputy Secretary (ITCC), Central Board of Director Taxes has passed Order under Sec. 119(2)(b) of IT Act, 1961 vide their Order No. F.No. 312/113/2020-OT dated 8.11.2023 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. Accordingly, the Board in exercis
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
