2014 (1) TMI 1414 - Commission - Indian Laws

Request for information - Right to information - The appellant has sought names of top Income Tax defaulters - Held that - Suffice to say that an assessee can be declared a defaulter only when he has not paid taxes as per law. In other words the Income Tax Department can declare a person a defaulter only after he has exhausted all the legal remedies available to him. Viewed thus the disclosure of information on para 2 is covered by the ratio of this judgment inasmuch as the State itself has been able to establish prima facie grounds to accuse the individual of wrong doing through properly conducted investigations/enquiries. Appellant has sought total Income Tax dues written off in last five years year-wise - Held that - The appellant has sought names of top Income Tax defaulters. There is no reason why this information should not be placed in public domain. - Decided in favour of appellant.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Disclosure of information sought under RTI application.
2. Applicability of exemptions under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act.
3. Right to privacy concerning disclosure of taxpayer information.
4. Public interest in disclosing tax-related information.
5. Duty of the Income Tax Department to provide requested information.

Analysis:
1. The appellant had filed an RTI application seeking various information related to Income Tax assesses, defaulters, recovery steps, tax assessments, collections, and write-offs. The CPIO and AA had provided limited information, citing exemptions under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act for certain queries.

2. The CPIO had denied information on some queries, stating that they were third-party information not disclosable under the RTI Act. However, the AA ordered disclosure of information on one query while transferring others to different departments. The appellant persisted in seeking information on specific queries related to tax assesses, defaulters, and write-offs.

3. The appellant argued for the disclosure of top Income Tax assesses and defaulters' names, emphasizing public interest and motivation for tax compliance. The Commission highlighted the importance of transparency and motivation for taxpayers, stating that disclosure of such information is unlikely to adversely affect Central Revenues.

4. The Commission referred to a Supreme Court judgment on the right to privacy concerning bank account details and emphasized the need for establishing prima facie grounds before disclosing sensitive information. The Commission noted that disclosure of defaulter information should be based on legal remedies exhausted and proper investigations conducted.

5. The Commission directed the Addl. DIT to provide information on specified queries related to tax assesses, defaulters, and write-offs for the last two years. The decision was made to balance the appellant's request with the workload of the department, emphasizing the public's right to know such information for transparency and accountability purposes.