38.6c New Delhi, India, Wednesday, December 24, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Husband not Entitled to Seek Information Regarding Bank Details & Income Tax Returns of His Wife under RTI Act, 2005: CIC [READ ORDER]

By Gautami Chakravarty      28 January, 2021 12:15 PM      0 Comments
Husband not Entitled to Seek Information Regarding Bank Details & Income Tax Returns of His Wife under RTI Act, 2005: CIC [READ ORDER]

The Central Information Commission in a recent matter at hand has held that a husband is not entitled to seek information regarding bank details & income tax returns of his wife under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Filing of the Income Tax Returns by an individual with the Income Tax Department is not a public activity, Neeraj Kumar Gupta the Information Commissioner has opined.

"It is in the nature of an obligation which a citizen owes to the State viz. to pay his taxes, this information cannot be disclosed to the applicant in the absence of any larger public interest", the Commission said.

Matter Before the Court

The husband who is the appellant was seeking information regarding the name and branch address of all those banks where his spouse was having an account in the financial years from 2012-2013 to 2017-2018. 

The appellant contended before the commission that the CPIO ( Central Public Information Officer) should have invoked Section 11 of the RTI Act, 2005.

Further, he submitted that the information regarding her bank details & income tax returns should be disclosed. But the respondent (CPIO, O/o. the Income Tax) submitted that the appellant was seeking clarification with regard to the bank details & income tax returns of his wife, which is personal in nature, hence CPIO, O/o. the Income Tax claimed exemption u/Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. It was also submitted that Section 11 of the RTI Act, 2005 can only be invoked if the CPIO intends to disclose the personal information and therefore, once the CPIO is satisfied that the information is to be denied under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005, Section 11 is not required to be invoked.


Lastly, the respondent stated that prima facie, no larger public interest is involved in the matter and hence, the CPIO did not intend to disclose the information.

Decision of the Commission-

The commission agreed with the Respondent in not invoking Section 11 of RTI Act, 2005 and observed that- 

"The CPIO is expected to follow the procedure of Section 11 when he 'intends to disclose any information or record'. In the present case, the CPIO did not find any merit in disclosure and accordingly, Section 11 was not invoked."


In the above said case, the Apex Court had ruled the details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are personal information which stand exempted from disclosure under clause of Section 8 of the RTI Act, 2005, unless it involves a larger public interest and the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information. It was retierated that  the basic protection afforded by virtue of the exemption from disclosure enacted under Section 8 cannot be lifted or disturbed unless the petitioner is able to justify how such disclosure would be in 'public interest'. Lastly, the Commission, after considering the factual matrix of the case was of the opinion that in the absence of any larger public interest in the matter, the appellant is not entitled to seek information regarding bank details & income tax returns of his wife which is exempted under Section 8 of the RTI Act, 2005.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

sheikh-hasina-blames-yunus-led-interim-government-for-deteriorating-india-bangladesh-relations
Trending International
Sheikh Hasina Blames Yunus-Led Interim Government for Deteriorating India-Bangladesh Relations

Sheikh Hasina blames the Yunus-led interim government for straining India-Bangladesh ties, citing hostile rhetoric and failure to protect minorities.

23 December, 2025 12:08 AM

TOP STORIES

sc-quashes-fir-against-r-ashoka-in-land-allotment-case
Trending Judiciary
SC Quashes FIR Against R. Ashoka in Land Allotment Case [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court quashes ACB FIR against Karnataka MLA R Ashoka in land allotment case, citing lack of sanction, malice and political vendetta.

18 December, 2025 07:58 PM
delhi-hc-appoints-sole-arbitrator-in-meghalaya-hotels-irctc-dispute-reiterates-bar-on-psu-curated-arbitration-panels
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Appoints Sole Arbitrator in Meghalaya Hotels–IRCTC Dispute; Reiterates Bar on PSU-Curated Arbitration Panels [Read Order]

Delhi High Court appoints sole arbitrator in Meghalaya Hotels–IRCTC dispute, reiterating Supreme Court’s bar on PSU-curated arbitration panels.

18 December, 2025 08:23 PM
fight-4-justice-awards-2025-live4freedom-and-dhcba-to-honour-landmark-legal-struggles
Trending Events & Opportunity
Fight 4 Justice Awards 2025: Live4Freedom and DHCBA to Honour Landmark Legal Struggles

Fight 4 Justice Awards 2025 on Dec 20: Justice N. Kotiswar Singh as Chief Guest; Live4Freedom and DHCBA honour landmark legal struggles.

20 December, 2025 04:30 PM
madras-hc-calls-for-audit-of-fees-paid-to-law-officers-criticises-exorbitant-payments-and-unnecessary-appearances-by-additional-advocate-generals
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Calls for Audit of Fees Paid to Law Officers; Criticises Exorbitant Payments and Unnecessary Appearances by Additional Advocate Generals [Read Order]

Madras High Court calls for audit of fees paid to law officers, flags exorbitant payments and unnecessary appearances by Additional Advocate Generals.

22 December, 2025 08:56 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email