Financial Express: New Delhi: Monday, June 25, 2018.
The wealth of
political leaders often becomes the talking point before assembly and
parliamentary elections. Names of richest and the poorest candidates, in
particular, get mentioned in newspaper columns. However, declaration about the
property owned by lawmakers, or those who are hopefuls, is sometimes subjected
to scrutiny by the Income Tax Department. However, this information is not
accessible to public through Right To Information Act. But the Election
Commission wants to make the report, which is only a verification report and
indicative in nature, public under the RTI Act, as per an Indian Express
report. However, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is learnt to have
told the Election Commission (EC) that the scrutiny of assets declared by
lawmakers in their poll affidavits cannot be disclosed to the public, due to
technicalities.
As per
information available to The Indian Express, the EC is of the view that since a
verification report is not an investigation report, its disclosure should not
be restricted under Section 24 of the RTI Act. The said act exempts certain
organisations from being covered under this law. These firms also include the
Director General of Income Tax (DGIT).
The Election
Commission is of the view that disclosure of scrutiny report is in the interest
of voters. As per the Commission, making public such information empowers
aggrieved or interested persons (such as losing candidates) to file a complaint
or an FIR against the persons who provide false information in the election
affidavit.
However, the
CBDT is learnt to have told the Commission that disclosing the verification
report is not “feasible” since it would violate of Section 138 of the Income
Tax Act.
The section
bars furnishing any information with regard to an assessee under the IT Act. It
also maintains that such disclosures are punishable. The CBDT doesn’t scrutinise
every poll affidavit submitted to it but only acts in the cases referred to it
by the commission. Generally, the EC asks the Commission to act in cases where
the contesting candidate’s assets have grown phenomenally since the last
elections, cases of winning candidates, cases where an elected member doesn’t
provide his PAN number, but the candidate’s movable assets are more than Rs 5
crore.