Non compliance was submitted against income tax CPIO

For detail, please take a glance of the following links-Non compliance and Appeal

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>

Dak Receipt Link Paper/Compliance/Non-Compliance
2 messages

Central Information Commission (CIC) <no-reply@nic.in> 30 December 2019 at 20:43
To: yogimpsingh@gmail.com

Dear Madam/Sir,
Your dak request has been diarised in the Commission. Request details are given below:

1 Appellant Name Yogi M P Singh
2 Address MOHALLA – SUREKAPURAM, JABALPUR ROAD, DIST. – MIRZAPUR – 231001
3 Diary Number 661245
4 Diary Date 30-12-2019
5 Letter Date NA
6 DAK Assign To (Section/ Office Incharge) Compliance Cell

We have recevied the Link Paper/Compliance/Non-Compliance. Your Diary no. is : 661245

Regards,
Central Information Commission (CIC)


Central Information Commission (CIC) <no-reply@nic.in> 30 December 2019 at 20:48
To: yogimpsingh@gmail.com
Dear Madam/Sir,
Your dak request has been diarised in the Commission. Request details are given below:

1 Appellant Name Yogi M P Singh
2 Address MOHALLA – SUREKAPURAM, JABALPUR ROAD, DIST. – MIRZAPUR – 231001
3 Diary Number 661246
4 Diary Date 30-12-2019
5 Letter Date NA
6 DAK Assign To (Section/ Office Incharge) Compliance Cell

We have recevied the Link Paper/Compliance/Non-Compliance. Your Diary no. is : 661246

Regards,
Central Information Commission (CIC)

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>

Whether to ask for Rs.21000.00 without initiating cure, on slip in a delivery case is legal as accepted by I.T. of Gov of India?

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 9 November 2019 at 00:06
To: pmosb <pmosb@pmo.nic.in>, presidentofindia@rb.nic.in, supremecourt <supremecourt@nic.in>, urgent-action <urgent-action@ohchr.org>, ito.systems1.1@incometax.gov.in, itombudspu@gmail.com, Anjali Anand Srivastava <secy-cic@nic.in>, registrar-cic@nic.in, mirzapur.addlcit3@incometax.gov.in, mirzapur.dcit3@incometax.gov.in
Hon’ble Sir, in regard to non compliance of order of CIC, Department of Income Tax of India finally replied as follows.
Gmail Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>

RIT Matter

mirzapur.dcit3 <mirzapur.dcit3@incometax.gov.in> 8 November 2019 at 13:48

To,

      Shri Mahesh Pratap Singh (Yogi M.P. Singh,
      Surekhapuram, Jabalpur Road, Mirzapur.
Subject-Reply of your RTI application dated 10.07.2019-regarding-
    Please refer to your mail dated 29.09.2019 on the above metioned subject.
    The Joint Commissione of Income Tax, Range-3, Mirzapur has already replied to your query vide his letter dated 26.09.2019 addressed to The
Central Information Commission, New Delhi with a copy marked to you.
Hon’ble Sir, aforementioned reply was made by the concerned in order to comply the direction made as –
Delhi ITO(S)-1 O/o ADG(S)-1 <ito.systems1.1@incometax.gov.in>
RTI MATTER -MOST URGENT-
 
Respected Madam/Sir,
Kindly refer to the subject matter along with the e-mail trail and the attachment(s) forwarded herewith.
 
Please find the attachment forwarded herewith, to RESOLVE the GRIEVANCE MOST URGENTLY.
 
Thanks and Regards.
 Respected accountable staffs concerned with the e-mails  mirzapur.dcit3@incometax.gov.in   mirzapur.addlcit3@incometax.gov.in –
Whether you don’t know the meaning of Please find the attachment forwarded herewith, to RESOLVE the GRIEVANCE MOST URGENTLY.
Sir,whether the following public authority is the supervisory body or subordinate body of the department of Income Tax of India, district-Mirzapur?
Delhi ITO(S)-1 O/o ADG(S)-1 <ito.systems1.1@incometax.gov.in>

First page of the attached documents to this representation is the communication exchanged by the CPIO itself dated-09/10/2019 with the applicant which explicitly interprets  to RESOLVE the GRIEVANCE MOST URGENTLYBut it is unfortunate that senior rank staffs of District- Mirzapur Department of income tax still don’t want to understand the simple and straight meaning of the one para direction of supervisory body. 
Hon’ble Sir-Factual position of the case is that matter reached at this stage because of lackadaisical approach of the senior rank staffs of the department of income tax District-Mirzapur as they reluctantly deal the matter concerned with the matter of ample evidences irregularities which is quite obvious in the reference matter.

Sir, whether it is not cryptic reply of department of income tax Mirzapur as-
The Joint Commissione of Income Tax, Range-3, Mirzapur has already replied to your query vide his letter dated 26.09.2019 addressed to The
Central Information Commission, New Delhi with a copy marked to you.  
Even a layman can understand that this e-mail communication is the subsequent action as applicant is not satisfied with aforementioned communication letter dated 26.09.2019 which implies that if the action was not taken on my e-mail communication dated-29 Sep 2019, 17:48 which means attached e-mail to this representation, applicant is bound to
file non compliance before the commission again as there is no other option for the applicant except to seek
redress of the complaint under section 18 of Right to Information Act 2005. Undoubtedly approach of CPIO
is positive but snior rank officers are playing the role of stumbling block as promoters of anarchy and
lawlessness in the system.
   Date-09/11/2019                                                           Please help Sir
                                                                                        Yogi M. P. Singh

 

On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 at 17:48, Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> wrote:
यह वही प्लेन  स्लिप है जिससे २१ हजार रुपये एक डिलीवरी के केस में लिया गया एक प्राइवेट नर्सिंग होम के द्वारा और भारत सरकार का आय कर विभाग कोई कार्यवाही नहीं किया और आज सूचना देने से भाग रहा है |

A complaint under section 18 of the Right to Information Act 2005.

To

                                  Chief Information Commissioner of India

                                The Central Information Commission,

                                            Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka,

                              New Delhi – 110 067

Appellant Yogi M. P. Singh, Mohalla-Surekapuram

Jabalpur Road, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code -231001

                Versus

1- CPIO, Income Tax Officer.

Ward 3(2). Mirzapur.

2-First appellate authority

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-III, Mirzapur.

 

Non-compliance of the order passed by Hon’ble Central Information Commission in the second appeals-CIC/CCITL/A/2017/603842-BJ &

CIC/DGITL/A/2017/603958-BJ Decision dated-03/09/2019

First Appellate Authority, Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range III Mirzapur was directed to enquire into the matter and submit its report to the commission under intimation to the appellant and furnish pointwise information to the appellant.

For detail, a copy is attached to the grievance amenable before the Hon’ble Sir.

In the compliance of the aforementioned order-F.A.A. aforementioned submitted its report –F.No. JCIT/R-3/Mirz./RTI/CIC Order/2019-20/266 dated-26/09/2019 with new information made available by the CPIO as F.No. ITO/W-3(2)/MZP/TDS/2019-20 Dated-26/09/2019 as annexure.

 For detail, a copy is attached to the grievance submitted before the Hon’ble Sir in order to seek compliance of decision passed as aforementioned.

In the name of the third party, the information sought can not be denied arbitrarily in order to conceal wrongdoings as the information seeker sought the information concerned with the grievance submitted by the aggrieved applicant itself so arbitrary denial of sought information by taking the recourse of the third party is against the spirit of Right to Information Act 2005. How a patient can be charged Rs.21000.00 before providing any services to her in the case of delivery and the entire transaction on a plain slip?

Sir- Sought information -1-Please made available details of action taken on the aforementioned grievance by the concerned staffs of public authorities.

Information made as-New reply is the same as the earlier reply-1. An enquiry was made by the inspector of this office regarding your grievance. As per the report of ITI  of

this office, the Dr Meena Vishwakarma is regular tax Payer and files her income tax return on regular basis, According to the doctor, the final bill has not been issued in your case because of payment of

Rs. 6,000/- has still not been made.

Sir – Matter is concerned to  Officer Name -SUBACHAN RAM

Officer Designation -Pr.CIT

Contact Address -Aayakar Bhawan 38, M.G. Road, Civil Lines, Allahabad and Commissioner of Income Tax, Officer name-GEET MALA MOHANANEY,

Officer Designation-

Pr.CIT Contact Address Aayakar Bhawan

38, M.G. Road, Civil Lines, Allahabad 211001

Think about the gravity of the situation that concerned Doctor demanded Rs.21000.00 at the time of admission of the patient and Rs.10000.00 was provided by the poor patient which was taken on slip without a description of charges. Latter on Rs.5000.00 without a description of charges and when the entire amount paid slip was taken and the patient was discharged.

Here my grievance or sought information is not concerned with whether the income tax return is filed by the proprietor of Harsh Maternity and Nursing Home? As it is third party information and bilateral matter but to seek action taken on the grievance or report on the grievance submitted by the applicant not only sought under the Right to Information Act 2005 but also under article 51 A of the constitution of India.

Sought information -3-Please made available the copy of the report which was made available by the Commissioner of Income Tax ALLAHABAD to Central Board of Direct Taxes (Income Tax).

Earlier reply-3. Information sought for does not pertain to this office.Latter replied by CPIO as –This information pertains to the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Allahabad.

Here they had to forward the matter to Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Allahabad under subsection 3 of section 6 of Right to Information Act 2005.

Sought information -4-Please made available name and designation of staff dealing with an aforementioned grievance in the office of income tax department Aayakar Bhawan 38, M.G. Road, Civil Lines, Allahabad 211001.

Earlier reply-4. Information sought for does not pertain to this office. Latter replied by CPIO as –Sri Rajesh Chaudhary, ITO, Ward 3 (2) Mirzapur.

When the grievance was processed by the Sri Rajesh Chaudhary, ITO, Ward 3 (2) Mirzapur then enquiry was made by him or someone authorized by him but the recommendation of action would be made by him under his own initiative to the competent authority. Where is the description of enquiry and conclusion of the report submitted to the senior rank officer concerned for action?

Information sought concerned with the following grievance.

This grievance is still available on the public grievance portal of the government of Uttar Pradesh. Following is the current status just copied by the applicant.

Grievance Concerns To

Name Of Complainant –Yogi M P SINGH Date of Receipt –13/09/2016

Received By Ministry/Department

Central Board of Direct Taxes (Income Tax)

Grievance Description

In a simple delivery case erring clinic took Rs.21000.00 on slip bearing no address or any authentication. CMO Chaurasia and the principal secretary has the rate list but don’t want to make public. Think about the gravity of the situation that private clinic run by famous lady doctor in the district Mirzapur Uttar Pradesh made the bill Rs/21000.00 on a slip out of which 10000.00 taken in advance and Rs.5000.00 on 11/09/2016 as obvious from the slip provided by the staffs of a nursing home on 12/09/2016.
13 September 2016 15:42
Hon’ble Prime Minister Sir whether C.B.D.T. AND its sister departments which come under the ambit of Ministry of finance which is subordinate ministry comes under direct supervision of PMO is too much busy in sending the messages to unemployed youths and students who are PAN Cardholders by confining to its offices instead of searching the tax evasions really taking place at large scale in the country.
With due respect, your applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.
1-It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that your applicant wants that public functionaries may ensure the rate list of services provided by the private clinic and nursing homes on the gate of nursing homes which may easily accessible to the patients and his family members and relatives. Your applicant made numerous representations in this regard which are languishing in the various offices of the government of Uttar Pradesh awaiting action but concerned are only procrastinating in the matter concerned ipso facto obvious from the attached documents with this representation.
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that whether good governance means few people may amass huge wealth while most may die of hunger and poverty. Whether the government will tax those people who are deprived of two square meal and those amassing huge wealth will take coffee and tea with the public functionaries.
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that how much surprising that those must be subjected to pay taxes are allowed to run their businesses without imposing any setup norms and regulation while who somehow to arrange two square meal is subjected to extreme mental and physical torture. Simply in a delivery case, family members have to deposit Rs.21000.00 merely on slip and no authenticated documents are made available to family members of the patient. Whether this is good governance, then what is anarchy?

This is a humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that It can never be justified to overlook the rights of the citizenry by delivering services in an arbitrary manner by floating all set up norms. This is sheer mismanagement which is encouraging wrongdoers to reap the benefit of loopholes in the system and depriving poor citizens of the right to justice. Therefore it is need of the hour to take concrete steps in order to curb grown anarchy in the system. For this, your applicant shall ever pray you, Hon’ble Sir.
‘Yours sincerely
Yogi M. P. Singh Mobile number-7379105911
Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road District-Mirzapur , Uttar Pradesh ,India .

Current Status –Case closed Date of Action -23/12/2016

Remarks –YOUR SUGGESTION HAS ALREADY BEEN FORWARDED TO THE CONCERNED OFFICE JURISDICTION I.E. JOINT COMMISSIONER, RANGE-3, MIRZAPUR FOR INFORMATION AND NECESSARY ACTION.

Rating –Poor

Rating Remarks –This is a signal of sheer anarchy. We are governed by jungle rule.

Officer Concerns To  Officer Name -SUBACHAN RAM

Officer Designation -Pr.CIT

Contact Address -Aayakar Bhawan 38, M.G. Road, Civil Lines, Allahabad

First  R.T.I. Communique-

It is submitted before the Honble Sir that please take a glance of the Status of the grievance as on 18 Dec 2016, regarding which information was sought by the applicant under Right to Information Act 2005.

Grievance Status Registration Number- CBODT/E/2016/12369 Name Of Complainant-

Yogi M P SINGH, Date of Receipt- 13 Sep 2016, Received by – Central Board of Direct Taxes

(Income Tax)

Forwarded to-Commissioner of Income Tax, Officer name-GEET MALA MOHANANEY,

Officer Designation-

Pr.CIT Contact Address Aayakar Bhawan

38, M.G. Road, Civil Lines, Allahabad 211001

Sought information -1-Please made available details of action taken on the aforementioned grievance by the concerned staffs of public authorities.

Sought information -2-Please made available the maximum duration taken by the department to redress the grievances by the citizenry.

Sought information -3-Please made available the copy of the report which was made available by the Commissioner of Income Tax ALLAHABAD to Central Board of Direct Taxes (Income Tax).

Sought information -4-Please made available name and designation of staff dealing with an aforementioned grievance in the office of income tax department Aayakar Bhawan 38, M.G. Road, Civil Lines, Allahabad 211001.

Earlier made available information by the CPIO-

                                                        GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

                                           INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MIRZAPUR

F.No.ITO 3(2)/MZP/RTl/2O16-17/1719                                                    Date : 29.03.2017

From.

CPIO

Income Tax Officer.

Ward 3(2). Mirzapur.

To.

Sri Mahesh Pratap Singh

Yogi M. P. SIngh

MohllaIIa-Surekapuram

Jabalpur, Road. Mirzapur.

Sub: e-RTI application. Registration No.DGICI/R/2016/50525 dated: 18.12.2016. under section 6(3) of

RT1 Act. 200$ of Shree Mahesh Pratap Singh, Yogi M.P. Singh. Mohalla-Surekapuram. Jabalpur

Road District- Mirzapur -reply regarding.

Please refer to the above-mentioned subject,

In this connection, the information sought by you Is as under:-

1. An enquiry was made by the inspector of this office regarding your grievance. As per the report of ITI  of

this office, the Dr Meena Vishwakarma is regular tax Payer and files her income tax return on regular basis, According to the doctor, the final bill has not been issued in your case because of payment of

Rs. 6,000/- has still not been made.

2. Information sought for is available in the public domain.

3. Information sought for does not pertain to this office.

4. information sought for does not pertain to this office,

The above information is made available to you. If you are not satisfied with the above, you can appeal

to the first appellate authority i.e. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-III, Mirzapur within 30 days.

                                                             Yours faithfully.

                                                          Income Tax Officer

                                                         Ward-3(2). Mkzapur.

Copy to. The Joint Commissioner of Income-tax,  RangeIII, Mirzapur for information

                                                                Income Tax Officer

                                                              Ward.3(2). Mirzapur.

It is quite obvious that point 2,3 and 4 still untouched through a cryptic dealing not in public interest and interest of this country.

 

Second R.T.I. Communique-

In regard to communication F.No. ITO 3(2)/MZP/RTI/ 2017-15/69 dated: 18/05/2017 by CPIO, Ward-III(2), Mirzapur as denied sought information in cryptic style by making a mockery of provisions of Right to Information Act 2005.

Information sought as-Hon’ble CPIO may provide the following information.

1-Please make available GO/CIRCULAR /ACT WHICH allows transaction on a slip.

2-Whether Rs.10000.00 is taken on slip without providing any description of charges. Please make available provision of the law allows such cryptic dealings.

3-Please made available information when more 5000.00 deposited, then also transaction was made on a slip.IT Mirzapur considers it legitimate. Please make available GO/CIRCULAR.

4-When rest of six thousand paid, then slip was taken and the patient was discharged and no receipt was given. Being top monitoring body, please provide the provision of law which allows such cryptic practice.

5-Matter concerned with  Commissioner of Income Tax, Officer name-GEET MALA MOHANANEY but department procrastinated by sending RTI Communiqué to various public authorities. Please explain the cause of procrastination.

Aforementioned sought information under five points denied by CPIO, Ward-III(2), Mirzapur as follows.

1-Information sought doesn’t pertain to this office.

2-Information sought doesn’t pertain to this office.

3-Action/inquiry has been made as par Income Tax Act 1961.

4- Information sought doesn’t pertain to this office.

5-Matter is being received being jurisdictional Assessing Officer as per prevalent practices.

Short submissions of your appellant are as follows.

1-CPIO violated provision subsection 1 of section 7 of the Right to Information Act 2005.

2-FAA instead to be instrumental in providing information to the information seeker only justified the illegal stand of the CPIO.

3-In the name of the third party, information is being concealed and wrongdoers are being protected.

4-Accountability of the CPIO may be decided as earlier knowingly violated the provisions of the Right to Information Act 2005 by not providing any information sought by the information seeker consequently took under teeth the provisions of Right to Information Act 2005.

5-Sir if earlier most of the points of information were overlooked by the CPIO wilfully, then why departmental action was not taken by the FAA against the CPIO? Which shows that sought information is being deliberately denied by CPIO and FAA by colluding with each other. Even after the order of the commission, they did nothing in order to ensure transparency and accountability in the office of public authority. Cryptically they denied the information sought concerned with the grievance.

This is a humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that how can it be justified to withhold public services arbitrarily and promote anarchy, lawlessness and chaos in an arbitrary manner by making the mockery of law of land? There is need of the hour to take harsh steps against the wrongdoer in order to win the confidence of citizenry and strengthen the democratic values for healthy and prosperous democracy. For this, your applicant shall ever pray you, Hon’ble Sir.

Date-29/09/2019                     Yours sincerely

                                       Yogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001.

 

 

 

Non compliance of order of CIC by CPIO IT.pdf
3487K

4 comments on Non compliance was submitted against income tax CPIO

  1. Think about the gravity of the situation that concerned Doctor demanded Rs.21000.00 at the time of admission of the patient and Rs.10000.00 was provided by the poor patient which was taken on slip without a description of charges. Latter on Rs.5000.00 without a description of charges and when the entire amount paid slip was taken and the patient was discharged.

    Here my grievance or sought information is not concerned with whether the income tax return is filed by the proprietor of Harsh Maternity and Nursing Home? As it is third party information and bilateral matter but to seek action taken on the grievance or report on the grievance submitted by the applicant not only sought under the Right to Information Act 2005 but also under article 51 A of the constitution of India.

  2. First they denied information when it was initially sought even after first appeal they did not provide the information and when the second appeal was made before the central information commission they also did not provide the sought information even after the direction of commission. Whether it is not mockery of the law of land and concerned public functionaries are not acting against The Spirit Of The Right to Information act 2005?

  3. Whether it is not the mockery of the law of land? Whether poor are not being subjected to exploitation?
    Think about the gravity of the situation that concerned Doctor demanded Rs.21000.00 at the time of admission of the patient and Rs.10000.00 was provided by the poor patient which was taken on slip without a description of charges. Latter on Rs.5000.00 without a description of charges and when the entire amount paid slip was taken and the patient was discharged.

    1. Revenue is the backbone of a country and it must not be under control of corrupt people but it seems that there is no effective control mechanism operated by honest people in this largest democracy in the world. Selfishness always creates dishonesty which is an unhealthy practice to this largest democracy in the world.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: