TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (6) TMI 678
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion was granted to them to bring this matter before the Commission for reconsideration. 2. Matter was accordingly heard on 19-5-2010 in the presence of the appellant, Shri R.K. Jain and the review-petitioners represented by their Counsel, Shri Balaji Subramanian. 3. In the Commission's order dated 26-3-2010, CPIO, Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange was directed to provide to the appellant the information requested by him in his RTI-application dated 11-8-2009. 4. The review-petitioners' point was that when the hearing - which resulted in the Commission's order dated 26-3-2010 - was conducted, the Tribunal had not filed its counter-statement, as a result of which important facts which could have a substantial bearing on the decision....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntain documents from organizations such as the Enforcement Directorate and others, which are far too sensitive to be shared openly with the appellant. The organisations such as the Enforcement Directorate were exempt organizations under Section 24 of the RTI Act. These may contain information relevant to investigation and prosecution and these could attract exemption under Section 8(1)(h). 7. Review-petitioners have also drawn attention to the third-party aspects of these documents and have urged that since the jurisdiction of the Tribunal extends to all over India, it might be well-high impossible to reach out to all the third-parties to take their consent under Section 11(1) about the disclosure of the requested information. 8. As rega....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owers given to the Commission for a wholesale review of an order already passed. 12. He went on to state that the ATFE has deliberately and craftily used the tactics of stonewalling any disclosure of information in order to keep permanently under shadows its own internal malfunctioning and serious irregularities, which transparency would bring out into the open. He cited an order of the Delhi High Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 3963/2008 dated 15-5-2009, where the alarming fact has been brought out that the files of the Tribunal did not have the final orders purported to have been passed by it. The High Court had adversely commented on the system of record management at the Tribunal. He claimed the Tribunal was aware that if the informatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... final orders were to be supplied to him. Respondents had cleverly and deliberately attempted to read extra words into a very ordinary expression, viz. orders. Had they chosen to consult the appellant he would have put them wise to the fact that all he needed was final orders and not any other variety of order. 15. About the use of expression "after cause list" in his RTI-application, appellant stated that this expression was very clearly understood by all those who manage cause-lists. However, if the respondents did not have any information answering this description, they were free not to disclose it to him. Decision : 16. I have gone through the averments of both parties and heard their oral submissions. I find myself in agreement wit....