Case Law Details
CPIO Vs Girish Mittal (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court held that Section 138(2) of the IT Act would prevail over Section 22 of the RTI Act. Thus, Central Information Commission (CIC) order directing to provide copies of the file notings granting the approval relating to PM CARES Fund under Right to Information (RTI) liable to be set aside.
Facts- The CPIO/Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax HQ Exemption, New Delhi has approached this Court challenging the Order dated 27.04.2022, passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC), directing the Petitioner herein to provide the copies of all the documents submitted in the exemption application No. CIT(Exemption), Delhi/2019-20/80G/11528 and copies of the file notings granting the approval relating to PM CARES Fund under the Right to Information (RTI) application filed by the Respondent. The said information was denied to the Respondent by the CPIO and the Appellate Authority on the ground that the information sought is exempted from disclosure u/s. 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Conclusion- In the present case, the question which arose was whether Section 138(2) of the IT Act which also contains a non-obstante clause would override Section 22 of the RTI Act or not. In view of the fact that Section 138(1)(b) of the IT Act mandates that information relating to an assessee can only be supplied subject to the satisfaction of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, as the case may be, it can be said that Section 138(2) of the IT Act would prevail over Section 22 of the RTI Act.
Held that the CIC does not have the jurisdiction to direct furnishing of information, provided for in Section 138 of the IT Act. In any case, even if they had the jurisdiction, the failure to give PM CARES, notice of hearing, would in itself have vitiated the impugned.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
