के (cid:3)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग(cid:18), मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:24)ी, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/CBDTD/A/2023/630305/CCITN Manish Amarchand Mehta .….अपीलकता(cid:18)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम PIO, Asst. Director of Income-Tax (Inv) Hq, Income Tax Dept.

RTTC Building, Seminary Hills, Nagpur – 440006 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 09.04.2025 Date of Decision : 22.04.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 15.12.2022 CPIO replied on : 02.01.2023 First appeal filed on : 15.02.2023 First Appellate Authority’s order : 23.03.2023 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 20.06.2023 Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI application (offline) dated 15.12.2022 seeking the following information:

“That I have given a statement in the month of October /November 2012 related to the income tax of Purti Group of Companies the Income tax Department Investigation Wing before the income tax officer Riddhi Dasani Madam. I would like to state here that the copy of my statement was not provided to me at that time. Therefore kindly supply the copy of my statement given in the matter of income tax of Purti Group of Companies.”

The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 02.01.2023 stating as under:

“The attention of the applicant is invited to the provision of section 24(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 read with the Second Schedule thereto wherein the Director General of Income-tax (Investigation) has been brought out of the scope of the RTI Act, 2005 inserted at serial No. 16, vide Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension's Notification No. GSR-235(E) dated 28.03.2008. The office of the Principal Director of Income-tax (Investigation), Nagpur falls under the jurisdiction and control of Director General of Income-tax (Investigation), Pune therefore, the provisions of RTI Act, 2005 are not applicable to this office. As a result, the information sought by the applicant cannot be provided.”

Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 15.02.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 23.03.2023, held as under.

“1 The first ground raised by the appellant is that the information sought by the appellant in the said RTI application dated 21/12/2022, is his own statement recorded during the month of October/ November 2012 related to Purti groups of company and copy of the same was not provided at that relevant time. He is not satisfied with the order of rejection of the RTI application as being the appellant he has asked for his own statement which is his right.

In this regard, it is seen that the CPIO has issued the order dated 02.01.2023, wherein information sought by the applicant was not provided in view of the section 24 of the RTI Act. Therefore the ground of appeal based on satisfaction of the appellant is not sustainable and hence rejected.

2 In the second ground of appeal, the appellant has claimed that the sec 8 (j) of RTI Act, 2005 prescribes information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest and he has sought his statement recorded during the month of October/ November 2012 related to Purti groups of company.

In this regard, the order dated 02.01.2023 issued by the CPIO is examined and it is observed that the CPIO, relying on the provisions of Section 24(1) of the RTI Act read with Second Schedule thereto, has observed that the information sought by the appellant cannot be provided. The appellant has appealed on the ground that section 8(j) is not attracted in his case.

However, as the CPIO in his order has taken the stand that as per section 24(1) of the RTI Act, information cannot be shared by the office of Director General of Income-tax(Investigation) as the KIT Act is not applicable to this office. The ground of appeal fails as section 8(j) will come into picture only when the RTI Act is applicable in the appellant