Anil Khanna Vs CPIO (CIC Delhi)
The Appellant interjected to state that after visiting the weblink as suggested by the CPIO it is difficult for him as a layman to deduce or cull out the exact order of GST Department, Govt of India as to what percentage of the amount received as incentive amount is to be payable to GST Department (Delhi) by him towards the GST Tax. He, therefore requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide a copy of the relevant orders/ notification of GST in this regard.
The CPIO explained that if the Appellant has any grievance/doubt regarding this issue pertaining to incentive/consideration he may knock the doors of competent adjudicating authority of GST so constituted to deal with such issues. Upon Commission’s instance, he further clarified that under GST , there is no concept of an incentive rather a related term is in place i.e. ‘consideration’; and for which he agreed to provide a copy of the relevant extract of notification to the Appellant which may suffices the information sought for.
The Commission at the outset upon a perusal of the facts on record and upon hearing both the parties observes that the relief claimed in the instant matter is not as much as about seeking access to information as much it is about the Appellant’s seeking clarification/inference to be drawn by the CPIO against his query.
From the standpoint of the RTI Act, the Appellant shall note that outstretching the interpretation of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act to include deductions and inferences to be drawn by the CPIO is unwarranted as it casts immense pressure on the CPIOs to ensure that they provide the correct deduction/inference to avoid being subject to penal provisions under the RTI Act.
However, by taking a liberal view in the matter and also in furtherance of hearing proceedings the Commission hereby directs the CPIO to provide an extract of a copy of relevant rules/notifications pertaining to ‘consideration’ which will suffices the information sought by the Appellant regarding percentage on amount received as incentive which needs to be payable to GST Department (Delhi) by him towards GST Tax.
A pertinent issue emanating from the instant case and similar nature of cases dealt with by this bench in the recent past is that a number of RTI Applications are being filed for seeking clarifications on various policy/ procedure matters of Public Authorities with regards to the applicant’s grievances for any claim as per their Rules/Notifications/Orders. It will be in the best interest of Respondent Public Authority to explore the viability of introducing/updating a FAQs Section on their website wherein the most commonly sought issues/clarifications and/or respective orders/circulars/their jurisdictions and also their powers/roles can be easily identified and relevant information in that regard can be placed in the public domain in keeping with the letter and spirit of suo motu disclosures prescribed under Section 4 of the RTI Act. This will also relieve the public authority from the burden of RTI Applications which are filed for merely seeking clarifications and not any specific record.
Comments are closed.