9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 861X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g information from the CPIO, Delhi-I : (A) Details and copy of the following information, documents, notices, correspondences, records, notes proceedings, manuscripts and reports in relation to :- (i) Order-in-Original No. 27-29/2004, dated 31-8-2004. (ii) Order-in-Original issued consequent to Remand Order of CESTAT F.No. 237-241/2008, dated 2-5-2008 [2008 (229) E.L.T. 240 (Tribunal)] (Diwan Saheb Fashions Pvt Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi-1). (B) Copies of all show Cause Notices, corrigendum, and response received thereto. (C) List of date of hearing fixed from date of issue of first Show Cause Notices i.e. 7-5-2002 31-3-2009 and copies of notice/letter of hearing and copies of request for adjournment of such hear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provided to you as the information contained in the file is in the capacity of fiduciary relation between the department and M/s. Diwan Sons (India) Pvt. Ltd. Further, the said file also contains information related to M/s. Diwan Sons (India) Pvt. Ltd. which is a third party. Since no larger public interest is involved which warrants the disclosure of information sought by the applicant, exemption is, therefore sought under section 8(1)(e) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005. Grounds of Appeal 4. Being aggrieved by the CPIO s order as above, the appellant has filed the present appeal on the following ground : (i) that the action of the learned CPIO in not providing the information to the appellant is arbitrary, illegal, mala fide and con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Department suspicious in the eye of the public; (vi) that the CPIO in his impugned order has claimed exemption under Section 8(1)(e) and 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, stating that no public interest or public activity is involved which warrants disclosure of information. The information sought by the appellant relates to a case where not only huge public revenue is involved but there has been allegation of tax evasion. The Central Excise Department is not a private party to the dispute involving evasion of huge amount of excise duty but it represents the government and the public. The records and files relating to protection of public revenue or enforcement of laws are public documents and providing access to the same serves larger public i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ic Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information. (ix) that the information sought by the appellant is not covered by the aforesaid exemption since the information relates to the adjudication process which is related to the discharge of the official duties of the public authorities, while holding public office. As such, the order of the CPIO is liable to be rejected on this ground. 5. In view of the submissions as above, the appellant has prayed that (a) the impugned order dated 6-5-2009 passed by the learned CPIO may be set aside and CPIO may be directed to provide the informati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the issue in this case pertains to the Adjudication branch of the Comrmssionerate, the CPIO forwarded the appeal to the Asst.. Commissioner (Adjudication). In the comments received vide letter C.No. V(62)15-CE/D-l/Adj/39/2009/3269, dated 26-6-2009, Asstt. Commissioner (Adjudication) has reiterated the grounds as taken by the CPIO while rejecting the application, though he has also stated that if the applicant/appellant asks for inspection of relevant records, request will be considered on merits. Discussion and Findings 8. I have carefully gone through the case records including the application dated 8-4-2009 filed by the appellant, the decision of the CPIO, the appeal filed against the CPIO s decision and the appellant s submission a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant, the adjudication of show cause notice for evasion of tax can by no stretch of imagination be treated as in the capacity of fiduciary relationship between the Department and the noticee. The adjudication is a quasi-judicial process in exercise of statutory powers. There is no question of any fiduciary relationship involved in this process. I, therefore, reject CPIO s stand for denial of information on the ground of fiduciary relationship. 12. Denial of information by the CPIO on the ground that no public interest was involved in disclosing the information also does not attract to reason. This was a case where huge public revenue was involved and allegation of duty evasion was there. Every citizen has, therefore, a right to know how ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
