CIC: Appellant to submit documents to demonstrate that there is a maintenance case pending before the judicial Court; On receipt of the same, the ITO to provide the generic details of the income of Appellant’s estranged husband for the latest period

Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application (online) dated 30.10.2023 seeking the following information:

“My name is Devangi Sandip Mehta W/O Sandip Pravinbhai Mehta, we married in 2010. I and my son Shlok Sandip Mehta were abandoned By My husband in the year 2018 and since then, we both live in my maternal home in Jamnagar.

In order for me and my son to get our rights and be accepted us, a case was registered against my husband in Jamnagar (Guj) Domestic Court in the year 2019.Which Reg no is 750/2019 (CNR No-GJJM020111142019). Even, my husband rejected us to accept before the court and that is why the court issued order an initial maintenance amount of Rs 5000 per month, the case is currently going on in the court.

In the year 2022, a new divorce case was filed by my husband in the family court which is going on in Jamnagar, whose reg no is 88/2023 (CNR NoGJJM160003062023).

In the above-mentioned cases, my husband stated before the court that his monthly income is Rs. 30,000 per month, which I feel is not true. It is difficult to accept that the salary is the same in the year 2019 and the year 2023.

It is not possible for anyone to accept a salary of Rs 30,000 per month on the post of senior manager in a big city like Ahmedabad, in a good position in a reputed company (Ved Technoserve India Pvt Ltd, Sambhaav Group)

I have come to know from my research that as the wife of Mr. Sandip Mehta, I have every right to know the generic details of my husband income (net income, gross income) and since the divorce case is going on in the court, I have the full right to know the details demanded by the wife for husband. Asking for generic details of own husband income is not considered personal information and the information about the husband income sought by the wife can be given by the IT department in this kind of special case. I do not want any photocopy of my husband income tax return. I am doing this RTI to provide the generic details of my husband income (net income, gross income) for the last 6 years, I hope that I will get a satisfactory answer. According to the information found on the internet, as per the order of Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gupta (Information Commissioner) dated 06/11/2020 to the Income Tax Officer, Jodhpur (Rajasthan), to provide complete details of husband generic income details (net income, Gross Income) which the applicant has asked. Apart from this, the decision of Mumbai High Court and Madhya Pradesh Court has also been based on the reply of similar RTI received from the Income Tax Department, keeping in mind the correct income stated in the RTI reply.

Accordingly, I hope that I will also get the complete details of the Generic income Details (Net Income, Gross Income) of my husband for the last 6 years under this RTI, which will help me and my son.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 07.11.2023 stating as under:

“The information is in the nature of personal tax profile of the aforesaid person nature of information called for by the applicant does not relate to any kind of public work or public service and would result in undue interference in the personal information of the above person. The disclosure of this information would cause -- invasion of the privacy of the concerned persons. This fact is covered by the invasion of the privacy of the concerned persons. This fact is covered by the ambit and scope of section 8(1) (j) of the RTI, which inter-alia provides exempt from disclosure of such information. The provisions of section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the Act, 2005 are in the nature of over-riding nature, which categorically prohibited information which relates to such information, the disclosure of which --relationship to any public activity or interest or which would cause -- invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority as the case be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of information. In the present case, the disclosure of this information does not any public interest. This application needs to be rejected for this reason alone.”

3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 08.11.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 19.12.2023, held as under.

“I am of the opinion that in the absence of any larger public interest in the matter, the appellant is not entitled to seek the details of the third party, Shri Sandip Mehta which is exempted u/s. 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act, 2005. CPIO & ITO, Ward-1, Gandhinagar has rightly disposed off the application covering all the points on which information sought by the applicant. The present appeal is disposed off as above.”

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Present through VC.

Respondent: Shri Bharat Adalaja, APIO-cum-Income Tax Inspector, attended the hearing through VC.

4. The Appellant stated that the Respondent has not provided the relevant information as sought in the instant RTI Application. She added that she needs this information to defend her matrimonial dispute case which is pending adjudication in the family Court.

5. The Respondent submitted that the information sought by the Appellant in the instant RTI Application pertains to personal information of third party which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act.

Decision:

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and in furtherance of hearing proceedings, directs the Appellant to submit relevant documents to the Respondent to demonstrate that there is a maintenance case/matrimonial case pending before the judicial Court. For said purpose, the Appellant is directed to submit complete litigation documents before the Respondent Public Authority, within 1 week from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of the same, the Respondent is directed to provide the “generic details of the net taxable income/gross income” of Appellant’s estranged husband for the latest period, free of cost, within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the documents from the Appellant.

The First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance with the directions.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Information Commissioner

Citation: Devangiben Sandip Mehta v. Office of the Income Tax Officer, CIC/CCITA/A/2024/602750; Date of Decision: 30.04.2025