Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“No doubt, it is true that the assets and liability of a public servant will have to be necessarily disclosed and cannot be shielded from public scrutiny but there should be a reasonable restriction of the same.”
“The information pertaining to an assessee cannot be granted under the Right to Information Act, 2005 in view of Section 138(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”
While drawing the conclusion that the application does not fulfil the requirements of Section 16, the respondent has merely referred to the objections raised in the hearing notice.
“This Court is of the opinion that the information that is being sought by the petitioner would impede the investigation conducted by the CBI involving a large-scale fraud, including many accused.”
by Kritika Krishnamurthy* and Anuroop Omkar**
Disclosure is the norm and refusal to information, an exception
Tripura High Court: The Division Bench of Akil Kureshi, CJ. and S.G. Chattopadhyay, J., dismissed a petition which challenged an order passed
Central Information Commission (CIC): Saroj Punhani (Information Commissioner), harmonised the conflicting interests of the parties keeping with the letter and spirit of
Bombay High Court: A Division Bench of S.S. Shinde and N.B. Suryawanshi, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed by the State against the
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of G.S Sistani and V Kameswar Rao, JJ., dismissed an appeal under Section 37 of
Circular on Mutual Funds [SEBI/HO/IMD/DF2/CIR/P/2017/35 dated April 28, 2017] 1.Please refer to SEBI Circular No. SEBI/HO/IMD/DF2/CIR/P/2016/42 dated 18 March 2016. 2.In partial
Cases Reported in 2014 SCC VOL. 6 JULY 14, 2014 PART 3 Termination whether based on material evidence, can be examined by