2015 (4) TMI 1067 - AT - Indian Laws

RTI application - Held that - Point A(v) is about the address of the house stated to have been taken on rent of ₹ 10,000/- by Shri S.K. Verma at Bangalore. Point A(vi) is about providing the address of all the Government quarters/residential accommodation allotted to Shri S.K. Verma during his tenure at Bangalore. Point B is regarding providing of details of information whether the matter regarding fraudulent claim of income tax deduction by Shri Verma by showing Government quarter as private property and claiming income tax deduction for the monthly rent of ₹ 10,000/- has been brought to the notice of the Registrar and Hon ble President.In my view the information/factual position in respect of point A(v), A(vi) and B can be provided. Accordingly the same may be provided forthwith. As regards the points A(iii) and A(iv), the same are in respect of providing certified copies of all the rent receipts of ₹ 10,000/- per month submitted by Shri Verma along with the copy of the communication in which he had sought income tax exemption in respect of HRA and providing certified copy of the communication received from Shri S.K. Verma, Asstt. Registrar, CESTAT, Bangalore under which the lease deed for the house claimed to have been taken by him on monthly rent of ₹ 10,000/- per month had been enclosed. In respect of as regards Point A(iii) and A(iv) regarding supply of certain documents (rent receipts and rent agreements), the Registrar should depute a responsible person for search of the documents within a period of one month. If the documents are not traced, the mater should be placed before Hon ble President for orders for an inquiry into the loss of the documents. If the documents are traced, the same should be furnished to the applicant. But if the documents are not traceable, and an inquiry is conducted a copy of the inquiry report should be furnished to the applicant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Information sought under RTI Act regarding fraudulent income tax deduction by an individual.
2. Unsatisfactory response by CPIO leading to an appeal.
3. Discrepancies in documents related to rent receipts and lease agreements.
4. Legal implications of presenting false information for income tax benefits.

Analysis:

1. The applicant filed an RTI application seeking information about an individual allegedly fraudulently claiming income tax deduction by showing a government quarter as private property and claiming rent for the same. The CPIO provided some information, but the applicant was unsatisfied and filed an appeal.

2. The CPIO disclosed that the individual in question, while posted in Bangalore, stayed in a government quarter but claimed HRA and submitted rent receipts for income tax exemption. The irregularity was detected upon the individual's transfer to Delhi. The CPIO provided some documents but mentioned that certain crucial documents like the lease agreement were not traceable.

3. The dispute mainly revolved around the missing documents, including certified rent receipts and the lease agreement. The CPIO stated that efforts to locate these documents were unsuccessful. The judge referred to a previous court judgment emphasizing the importance of making thorough efforts to locate information before expressing inability to provide it.

4. The judge directed the CPIO to furnish the required information promptly for some points. However, for the missing documents, a responsible person was to be appointed for a thorough search within a specified time. If the documents were not found, an inquiry was to be initiated to determine responsibility for the loss. The judge highlighted the necessity of conducting a meaningful inquiry in such cases to ensure accountability.

By addressing the discrepancies in the documents and emphasizing the need for a thorough search and inquiry, the judgment aimed to uphold transparency and accountability in providing information under the RTI Act.