Can a citizen seek the copy of an Income Tax return (ITR) of an individual or a Company under the RTI Act, 2005? And if not the copy, can he seek ITR related information of a third party/person? The answer is No. Why such information is not disclosable has been examined by the Central Information Commission (“CIC”), High Courts and Hon’ble Supreme Court. Some of their rulings are as under:
Why is an ITR information not disclosable?
- CIC: ITRs contain commercial information for enabling the Income Tax Department to determine the tax liability flowing from it, such Returns should also attract provision of Section 8(1) (d) the RTI Act. Disclosure can have implications on the individual’s commercial competitive interest[1].
- CIC: Information contained in the ITRs is decidedly a personal information and will be a gross intrusion on the privacy of the individual, the allegation that assesse is somewhat guilty of tax evasion will not prevail[2].
- CIC: Protection of personal information, especially of a third-party, is a valuable privilege which should not be lightly done away with or diluted. There is no public interest in the statement that information is being sought to safeguard the State’s revenue as internal checks and balances, as well as appellate provision, are all in place to protect the State’s revenue[3].
- Supreme Court: Details disclosed in ITRs is “personal information” exempted under Section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act, unless the case involves a larger public interest and the Public Information Officer(CPIO) or the State Public Information Officer(SPIO) or the Appellate Authority(AA) is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies disclosure of information.[4]
- Delhi High Court: Information contained in ITR would be personal information under Section 8(1)(j). Filing of an RTI return or an individual pursuing his assessment with the income tax authorities is not a public activity and such information is not to be disclosed unless a larger public interest is involved[5] Details of the case can be accessed here-Naresh Kumar Trehan v. Rakesh Kumar Gupta in W.P.(C) 85/2010 & CM Nos.156/2010 & 5560/2011; Date of Decision:24.11.2014.
- Bombay High Court: “Mere apprehension that a third party has declared income, which is lower than the true income, cannot justify disclosure of Income Tax Returns in larger public interest” [6]
What if the ITR information is required for defending self in court?
In the case of Sumit Kumar Agrawal[7] the CIC directed disclosure of the net taxable income of the father in law of the applicant for the period of 2003-2004, 2004-2005 on the ground that information is required to be disclosed for a speedy dispensation of justice and to provide a level playing field to the applicant to defend himself in a criminal case. However, in a recent case[8], when the Applicant submitted that he requires the ITRs to defend himself in the Lower Court at Jaipur in respect of domestic violence filed by his wife and that the divorce proceedings were underway, the CIC relying on the decision of the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court and Mumbai High Court held that no intervention is required in the decision of the CPIO who had held that such an information is personal information, exempted under Section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act.
Conclusion:
The reasons for non-disclosure of ITR related information of a third party, have been very well enunciated by the CIC and the Courts and unless the CPIO, AA or the Central Information Commission finds that a larger public interest exists in the disclosure of such information, it should not be disclosed.
[1] Amol Ganpat Rackvi Vs. Income Tax; Appeal No. CIC/AT/A/2007/0031; Date of Decision:17.5.2007
[2] Amol Ganpat Rackvi Vs. Income Tax; Appeal No. CIC/AT/A/2007/0031; Date of Decision:17.5.2007
[3] Alka Mehta Vs. Income Tax; Appeal No. CIC/AT/A/2007/00781; Date of Decision: 10.12.2007
[4] Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commission & ors. SLP(C) No. 27734 of 2012; Date of Decision: 03/10/2012
[5] Naresh Kumar Trehan v. Rakesh Kumar Gupta in W.P.(C) 85/2010 & CM Nos.156/2010 & 5560/2011; Date of Decision:24.11.2014
[6] Shailesh Gandhi v. CIC and Ors WP 8753 of 2013; Date of Decision: 06.05.2015, High Court of Bombay
[7] Sumit Kumar Agrawal vs. CBDT in Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2012/000174; Date of Decision: 27.04.2012
[8]Mr. Piyus P Sharma Vs. CPIO, ITO, Ward–5(5), Office of the ITO, Second Appeal No:- CIC/CCITJ/A/2017/171223-BJ; Date of Decision:10.6.2019
31 Comments
Comments are closed.