Documents held by schedule II organisation for a period prior to initiation of investigation
21 Mar, 2012Background
The appellant sought various information related to import of old and new garments, like details of all bills of entry in respect of used garments assessed provisionally from Aug 2001 until Sept 2010, the name of the Importer, B.E. number & date, amount of security deposit and date of provisional assessment. He also asked about the file notings related to provisional assessment of used garments for the said period. The Public Information Officer (PIO) refused to give the information invoking 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; of the RTI Act. He was also advised the appellant to approach the Statistical Department of Foreign Trade Statistics of India for his query. The copies of file notings related to provisional assessment of used garments were also refused claiming that the relevant portion of notings contained inputs from various intelligence agency like the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Special Investigation Branch etc. which are the excluded agencies as per section 24 of the RTI Act. On appeal, the First Appellate Authority (FAA) upheld the decision of the PIO.
View of CIC
The applicant took the stand that the information pertaining to the above mentioned period is not being investigated by DRI as the involvement of DRI started at the end of 2008. The respondents submitted that all information pertaining to “old and used garments” are interconnected before 2008 after 2008, because all information belongs to the same kind of imported consignments of “old and used garments” and also almost all importers are same in both periods. There was mis-declaration in the Bills of Entries which were heavily undervalued and were provisionally assed by the department. The outcome of investigation by DRI will form the base for finalization of the provisionally assessed Bills of Entries and any attempt to divulge that information may jeopardize the investigation outcome of DRI which will be against public exchequer.
The Central Information Commission observed that information sought by the appellant regarding details of importer’s bill of entry assessed provisionally on “old & used garments” attract the provision of 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; of RTI Act since it contains information that might affect their commercial interest. Further the Commission accepted the plea of the respondent that the matter was being investigated by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) which is an excluded organization under section 24 of RTI Act and disclosure of information could hamper the investigation being carried out by it, and hence the provisions of section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; and section 24 of the RTI Act are also attracted in the present case.
Comments
Documents which are held by a schedule II organisation pertaining to a period for which investigation was done by any other agency, can be claimed as beyond the purview of the RTI Act. Disclosure of documents at the stage of investigation may create external pressure on the investigating authority and constrict the freedom with which such investigation is to be conducted thereby hampering the outcome.
Citation: Shri Salman Sharif v. Office of the Commissioner of Customs in File No. CIC/SS/A/2011/001142
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2012/CIC/163
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission