TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. - The above said information should be provided by the CPIO free of cost to the Appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission. Appeal disposed off. - CIC/DGSTCX/A/2021/129351 - - - Dated:- 19-9-2022 - Saroj Punhani, Information Commissioner Information sought: The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 27 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h intra-video conference. The CPIO relied on his written submission dated 09.09.2022 wherein it was mentioned that although the original RTI Application was transferred to him by the CPIO, GST Council, New Delhi; however, it was not traceable in their office records. It was only after receipt of its copy along with hearing notice a categorical reply was provided to the Appellant on 09.09.2022 inviting his attention towards specific hyperlink of the Website from where the specific notification of GST can be accessed. He further explained that all GST Rules and notifications are already in the public domain and which are self explanatory. As per various rulings of Hon ble CIC the CPIO is not supposed to interpret such Rules/Notifications a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. In this regard, his attention is also drawn towards a judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court on the scope and ambit of Section 2(f) of RTI Act in the matter of CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay Ors.[CIVIL APPEAL NO.6454 of 2011] wherein it was held as under: 35. At this juncture, it is necessary to clear some misconceptions about the RTI Act. The RTI Act provides access to all information that is available and existing A public authority is also not required to furnish information which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 clarificat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
