{"id":3749,"date":"2016-06-23T08:57:08","date_gmt":"2016-06-23T03:27:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/?p=3749"},"modified":"2016-06-23T08:57:08","modified_gmt":"2016-06-23T03:27:08","slug":"10542-2014","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/10542-2014\/","title":{"rendered":"CIC deny Wife RTI seeking husband Income"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Club Building (Near Post Office)<br \/>\nOld JNU Campus, New Delhi \u2013 110067<br \/>\nTel: +91-11-26101592<\/p>\n<p>File No. CIC\/CC\/A\/2014\/002812\/BS\/10542<\/p>\n<p>09 June 2016<\/p>\n<p>Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:<\/p>\n<p>Appellant : Smt. Bijal N Upadhyay,<br \/>\nR\/o \u2013 653, Kribhconagar,<br \/>\nHazira Road, Surat \u2013 394515<\/p>\n<p>Respondent : CPIO \/ DDO \u2013 20(1),<br \/>\nIncome Tax Department,<br \/>\nO\/o the JCIT \u2013 DDO Range \u2013 20(1),<br \/>\nRoom No \u2013 602, 6th Floor,<br \/>\nPiramal Chambers, Lalbagh, Parel,Mumbai \u2013 400012<\/p>\n<p>CPIO \/ ITO (HQ) Systems, Mumbai,<br \/>\nIncome Tax Department,<br \/>\nO\/o the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax,<br \/>\nRoom No \u2013 380, 3rd Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Mumbai \u2013 400020<\/p>\n<p>RTI application filed on : 05\/06\/2014<br \/>\nPIO replied on : 29\/07\/2014<br \/>\nFirst appeal filed on : 28\/08\/2014<br \/>\nFirst Appellate Authority order : 29\/09\/2014<br \/>\nSecond Appeal dated : 27\/11\/2014<\/p>\n<p>Information sought:<\/p>\n<p>The appellant has sought following information in respect of Mr. Ashok Kumar P Upadhyay:<br \/>\n\u2022 Monthly income including medical facilities, Overtime<br \/>\n\u2022 Bonus, LTC, TADA, Tour Allowances\/expenses, Gifts etc.<br \/>\n\u2022 Conveyance allowance, Transportation allowance, Education allowance<br \/>\n\u2022 Provident Fund (PF), VPF, Pension fund, Gratuity, Annual Property Return,<br \/>\n\u2022 Other perks and allowances (eg. washing allowance, Magazine allowance, Canteen allowance or coupons), Loan Facilities and status of availing of the same<br \/>\n\u2022 Sodexo pass or such other vouchers<br \/>\n\u2022 Other remunerations.<\/p>\n<p>Grounds for the Second Appeal:<\/p>\n<p>The CPIO has not provided the desired information.<\/p>\n<p>Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:<\/p>\n<p>The following were present Appellant: Smt. Bijal N Upadhyay through VC Respondent: Mr. Pawan Kumar CPIO through VC The appellant stated that she needs the information sought in her RTI application dated 05\/06\/2014. She submitted that the information is needed for submission to the Family Court in connection with a domestic violence and maintenance case. The CPIO stated that the information relates to third party and they had carried out the process as outlined under Section 11 of the RTI Act, however, the assessee has objected to the disclosure. The appellant stated that the assessee is her husband and has abandoned her and her minor daughter. She informed that Shri Upadhyay the assessee has left his job and has gone in acting line.<\/p>\n<p>Decision notice:<\/p>\n<p>The Hon\u2019ble Supreme Court in the matter of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande [decision dated 03\/10\/2012 \u2013 SLP(C) No. 27734 of 2012] has held that information relating to income tax return of an assessee is \u201cpersonal information\u201d which stands exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, unless the CPIO is satisfied that larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information.<\/p>\n<p>The Hon\u2019ble High Court of Delhi vide it decision dated 01\/07\/2009 [W.P.(C) 803\/2009 Vijay Prakash vs. UOI and others] has 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 \u2018public interest\u2019.<\/p>\n<p>The appellant has pleaded that the information is required by her for submission to the Court so that proper maintenance is fixed for her and her minor daughter. If it be so, the appropriate remedy available to her would be to apply to the concerned Court for summoning the records of the Income Tax Department but seeking such information under the provisions of Right to Information Act is certainly not an appropriate relief.<\/p>\n<p>The matter is closed.<\/p>\n<p>BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:<\/p>\n<p>(R. L. Gupta)<br \/>\nDy. Registrar\/Designated Officer<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Club Building (Near Post Office) Old JNU Campus, New Delhi \u2013 110067 Tel: +91-11-26101592 File No. CIC\/CC\/A\/2014\/002812\/BS\/10542 09 June 2016 Relevant Facts&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1091,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_customify_content_layout":"","_customify_sidebar":"","_customify_page_header_display":"","_customify_disable_header":"","_customify_disable_header_top":"","_customify_disable_header_main":"","_customify_disable_header_bottom":"","_customify_disable_page_title":"","_customify_disable_content_vertical_padding":"","_customify_disable_footer_top":"","_customify_disable_footer_main":"","_customify_disable_footer_bottom":"","_customify_breadcrumb_display":"","_customify_header_transparent_display":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[65],"tags":[43069,43063,1754,135,2832,43068,21255,43071,43067,43065,43062,1756,43064,43072,43070,2180,43066],"class_list":["post-3749","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judgments","tag-annual-property-return","tag-basant-seth","tag-central-information-commission","tag-cic","tag-cpio","tag-gratuity","tag-income-tax-department","tag-mr-ashok-kumar-p-upadhyay","tag-pension-fund","tag-provident-fund-pf","tag-r-l-gupta","tag-right-to-information-act","tag-section-81-of-the-rti-act","tag-smt-bijal-n-upadhyay","tag-sodexo-pass","tag-supreme-court","tag-vpf"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3749","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1091"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3749"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3749\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3749"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3749"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mynation.net\/docs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3749"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}