Can information regarding Keyman Insurance Policies be disclosed under RTI?
24 Oct, 2012Background
The appellant filed five identical applications under the Right to Information (RTI) Act with various offices of Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) of India seeking information regarding Keyman Insurance taken in by LIC. The Public Information Officer (PIO) denied the information under section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; and 7(9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. of the RTI Act. The Central Information Commission (CIC), noted that three more identical RTI applications of the same date were filed with three different Zonal Offices of LIC, and the appeals of which were heard by the Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner and vide order dated 28.9.2011, the information was denied under sections 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; and 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the RTI Act.
Proceeding
During the hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the appellant contended that these policies are assigned in favour of Key persons at around 15% of the amount paid by the Company resulting in tax evasion and siphoning of funds by Key persons. The information is being sought to protect the interest of minority shareholders and it was the issue of strong public interest. The respondents stated that the information pertaining to Keyman Insurance Policies is of commercial confidence and is held in a fiduciary capacity hence exempted under section 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; and 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; of the RTI Act. They also submitted that LIC does not maintain the data on Keyman Insurance Policies separately and it would be impossible to cull out the information from a data bank of 47 crore policies and would disproportionately divert resources under section 7(9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. of the Act. The appellant then requested that if it is not possible to extract the data as asked by him, he may be provided information regarding policies which have an annual premium of more than Rs.5 lakh of endowment policies. The public authority submitted that it was not possible to extract even this data without sifting through 47 crore policies.
View of CIC
The Commission observed that the issue of tax evasion in respect of Keyman Insurance Policies has been discussed in detail by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Rajan Nanda. The Court has held that every assessee has the right to plan its affairs in such a manner which may result in payment of least tax possible, albeit, in conformity with the provisions of the Act. It is also permissible to the assessee to take advantage of the gaping holes in the provisions of the Act. The job of the Court is to simply look at the provisions of the Act and to see whether these provisions allow the assessee to arrange their affairs to ensure lesser payment of tax. If that is permissible, no further scrutiny is required and this would not amount to tax evasion. The Commission rejected the appeal holding that the contention of the appellant, that the issue of larger public interest involving tax evasion and siphoning of funds by Key persons, is devoid of any merit.
Citation: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta v. LIC of India in File No.CIC/DS/A/2011/001995/RM
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2012/CIC/743
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission