NEW
DELHI, Mar 26, 2006 : CAN one
seek details of PAN or TAN of certain corporates or individuals under RTI Act?
Such an information related to 26 companies was sought from the CPIO of the
Directorate of Systems of Income Tax which predictably rejected it. The Appellate
authority also did the same and the matter finally reached the Central Information
Commission which appears to be doing a commendable job quite seriously. While
going into the intention and rationale of seeking such an information in public
interest the CIC also observed that PAN / TAN is a statutory identification
number and making them public make result in misuse. It may compromise financial
transactions of these bodies. Hece, such information cannot be shared under
the RTI Act.
Let's
now go to the sister revenue department where the CPIO, a Commissioner, went
in appeal to the CIC against the Appellate Authority for overruling its decision.
While interpreting the provisions of the Act the CIC underlined that a CPIO
himself cannot seek information under RTI Act against its own appellate authority.
The CPIO, a Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai, is an information provider,
and not the seeker of information and hence they should restrain themselves
from coming to CIC.
In
the case of Customs, one information seeker wanted the Customs to publish the
names of importers/exporters along with the daily trade data. When the CIC was
approached it upheld the decision of CPIO which argued that the disclosure of
the names of the importer/exporter in the daily list has been forbidden by finance
ministry notification (128/2004-Cus (NT) dated 19.11.2004), amending the Rule
for Publication of Daily Lists of Imports and Exports, which was mandatory provision
for the last 49 years. Further, these rules are in the nature of subordinate
legislation and have the legal force of Parliament, hence can be exempted under
RTI Act.
These
small cases indeed tend to indicate the the RTI Act has rapidly been maturing
and it is indeed destined to serve the long-term goals of the legislation and
also protect the larger public interest by providing necessary information in
public domain.
(See
2006-HRIOL-17-CIC
in RTI Case Laws)
