##PAGE1##

के (cid:574)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission

बाबा गंगनाथ माग(cid:330), मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:671)ी, New Delhi – 110067

File No: CIC/CCACH/A/2024/127602

Arya Hitesh Raval .….अपीलकता(cid:330)/Appellant

VERSUS बनाम CPIO,

Office of the Asst.

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), 1510, 2nd Floor,

Mayflower Midcity, Trichy Road, Coimbatore – 641018 ….(cid:366)ितवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing : 11.03.2026 Date of Decision : 27.03.2026

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 01.04.2024 CPIO replied on : 22.04.2024 First appeal filed on : 11.05.2024 First Appellate Authority’s order : 06.06.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 15.07.2024

Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.04.2024 (offline) seeking the following information:

CIC/CCACH/A/2024/127602 Page 1 of 4

1 / 5

“Under the Right to Information Act, 2005, kindly furnish certified copies of the following documents in a format that suits your convenience,

pertaining to M/s ISHA FOUNDATION (PAN: AAATIxxxxx)

1. Form 10B for the year 2022-23 (FY ending 31st March 2023) 2. Form 10B for the year 2021-22 (FY ending 31st March 2022)”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 22.04.2024 stating as under:

“The information cannot be shared since the nature by which the information sought by the applicant will serve the larger public interest involved is not clearly explained by the applicant. According to section 8(1)(e) of Right to Information Act, 2005, the information sought by the applicant is in fiduciary capacity of this office and no larger public interest is brought in the RTI. Hence, the information cannot be

disclosed.”

3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.05.2024.

The FAA vide its order dated 06.06.2024, upheld the reply of CPIO.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Absent

Respondent: Shri Aishwarya, CPIO/Dy. Commissioner, appeared through video conference.

5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal/Complaint on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 15.07.2024 is not available on record. The Respondent confirmed non-service. Thus, Regulation No. 10 of the Central Information Commission Management Regulations 2007 has not been

complied with by the Appellant.

CIC/CCACH/A/2024/127602 Page 2 of 4

2 / 5

6. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the information sought pertains to a third-party entity, namely M/s ISHA FOUNDATION, and the documents sought i.e., Form 10B are held by the department in a fiduciary capacity. It was further submitted that such information is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005 and no larger public interest has been demonstrated by the Appellant to

warrant disclosure.

Decision:

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent and perusal of the records, notes that despite due notice, the Appellant did not appear to plead his case or to contest the submissions made by the Respondent. In the absence of the Appellant, the

submissions made by the Respondent remain uncontroverted.

8. The Commission notes that the information sought pertains to third- party documents (Form 10B of M/s ISHA FOUNDATION) which are held by the Income Tax Department in a fiduciary capacity. Such information is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005 unless a larger public interest is established. In the present case, no such larger public interest has

been demonstrated either in the RTI application or during the proceedings.

9. In view of the above, the Commission finds no infirmity in the reply furnished by the Respondent. Accordingly, intervention of the Commission is

not warranted in the matter.

The appeal is disposed of accordin