| COURT: |
|
| CORAM: |
|
| SECTION(S): |
|
| GENRE: |
|
| CATCH WORDS: |
|
| COUNSEL: |
|
| DATE: |
(Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: |
October 5, 2012 (Date of publication) |
| AY: |
|
| FILE: |
|
| CITATION: |
|
|
|
Income-tax details can be disclosed under RTI only if in “larger public interest”
The Petitioner sought details of the Respondent’s movable and immovable properties and also the details of investments, lending and borrowing from Banks and other financial institutions. He has also sought for the details of gifts stated to have accepted by the Respondent, his family members and friends and relatives at the marriage of his son. The information sought for finds a place in the income tax returns of the Respondent. The Supreme Court had to consider whether the information sought for qualifies to be “personal information” as defined in clause (j) of S. 8(1) of the RTI Act. HELD by the Supreme Court:
The details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are “personal information” which stands exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, unless it involves a larger public interest and the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information. On facts, as the Petitioner has not made a bona fide public interest in seeking information, the disclosure of such information would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
Related Posts:
- H. S. Ramchandra Rao vs. CIT (Supreme Court) The substance of the admission is that the appellant was holding the post of Secretary of the Institution [Paramahamsa Foundation (R) Trust] until 1996 but he left the institution after new members were elected as the managing committee. That being the case, the question of appellant invoking the principle of…
- In Re: Guidelines For Court Functioning Through Video Conferencing During Covid-19 Pandemic (Supreme… Every individual and institution is expected to cooperate in the implementation of measures designed to reduce the transmission of the virus. The scaling down conventional operations within the precincts of courts is a measure in that direction. Access to justice is fundamental to preserve the rule of law in the…
- Raj Pal Singh vs. CIT (Supreme Court) For chargeability of income-tax, the income ought to have either arrived or accrued. In the matter of acquisition of land under the Act of 1894, taking over of possession before arrival of relevant stage for such taking over may give rise to a potential right in the owner of the…
- UOI vs. P. D. Sunny (Supreme Court) There shall be ex-parte ad-interim stay of the impugned judgment and order(s) passed in the aforesaid writ petitions and of further proceedings before the High Court(s), in view of the stand taken by the Government of India through learned Solicitor General, before us, that the Government is fully conscious of…
- Ramnath & Co vs. CIT (Supreme Court) The principles laid down by the Constitution Bench in Dilip Kumar (2018) 9 SCC 1, when applied to incentive provisions like those for deduction, would also be that the burden lies on the assessee to prove its applicability to his case; and if there be any ambiguity in the deduction…
- PILCOM vs. CIT (Supreme Court) The obligation to deduct Tax at Source under Section 194E of the Act is not affected by the DTAA and in case the exigibility to tax is disputed by the assesse on whose account the deduction is made, the benefit of DTAA can be pleaded and if the case is…
Yes the Income Tax Details should not be made public. Anybody can get the details of Property, Bank Accounts of any person and he can play the mischief with these investments/properties, which is more dangerous. Further, the Income Tax details are only personal and private details of the person. Hence need not be shared in RTI.
Sir,pl.kindly clarify, whether the Court Execution order by a Garnishee to recover the amount as directed by the court from an employee and if anybody requried about the status of recovery and its remittance to the court, falls under Sec 8 (1) (j) of RTI ACT ,since it is connected with an employee who is a Debtor.Pl.kindly enlighten me in a possible near future.Sincerely yours,K.THIYAGARAJAN