<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (3) TMI 622 - CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151869</link>
    <description>Annual property returns of government employees were treated as disclosable public information, as disclosure was seen to advance accountability and assist detection of unexplained assets; the privacy exemption under Section 8(1)(j) was not accepted for the returns available with the public authority. However, copies of Group &#039;C&#039; employees&#039; property returns were not directed to be supplied because the applicable conduct rules required returns only from Group &#039;A&#039; and Group &#039;B&#039; employees and the requested records were not shown to be on file. Disclosure was therefore allowed only to the extent of records actually held.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:35:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168907" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (3) TMI 622 - CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151869</link>
      <description>Annual property returns of government employees were treated as disclosable public information, as disclosure was seen to advance accountability and assist detection of unexplained assets; the privacy exemption under Section 8(1)(j) was not accepted for the returns available with the public authority. However, copies of Group &#039;C&#039; employees&#039; property returns were not directed to be supplied because the applicable conduct rules required returns only from Group &#039;A&#039; and Group &#039;B&#039; employees and the requested records were not shown to be on file. Disclosure was therefore allowed only to the extent of records actually held.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>