The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench has held that the GST return information of a company cannot be disclosed under RTI.
The bench of Justice Arun R. Pedneker has observed that GST Act being a special enactment and a later enactment would override the RTI Act (general enactment) and the information which is prohibited to be provided under Section 158 of the GST Act cannot be disclosed under the RTI Act.
The petitioner, Adarsh filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 with Jan Mahiti Adhikari / Assistant State Tax Commissioner and sought information in respect of submissions of GST from the financial year 2008 to 2023 of six different industries from Tq. Udgir, Dist Latur. Those are M/s. Vyankateshwara Mahila Audyogik Utpadak Sahakari Sanstha, Udgir, M/s. Aniket Trading Company, Udgir, M/s. Mayureshwar Trading Company, Udgir, M/s. New Prasad Products and Agencies, Udgir, M/s. Kalyani Trading, Udgir and M/s. Prasad Industries, Udgir.
In pursuance of the application the Information Officer issued notice to the concerned Industries seeking response on the application. The concerned Industries responded with objection to provide information to the Petitioner. Thereafter, the application filed by the Petitioner was rejected.
The Petitioner submitted that the Information Officer ought not to have issued notices to the concerned Industries and that the information ought to have been provided to him without issuing notice to the Respondents.
The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 19 (1) of the RTI Act before the First Appellate Officer/ Deputy State Tax Commissioner.
The Petitioner preferred separate appeals. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeals for the reason that the firm had denied consent to provide information to a third party and confirmed the order passed by the Jan Mahiti Adhikari / Assistant State Tax Commissioner.
The Petitioner preferred a second appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the State Information Commissioner. By the impugned order dated 30.12.2024 the State Information Commissioner dismissed the second appeal filed by the Petitioner upholding the orders passed by the Respondent.
The petitioner contended that the GST returns are public documents and not a secret information that is not to be disclosed. It is also not a third party information given under Section 11 of the RTI Act. The information sought is not protected by law or cause harm to the public at large and therefore the information sought by the Petitioner is a public document and needs to be provided.
The issue raised was whether Section 158 of the GST Act would also be an impediment in providing information under the RTI Act.
Section 158 (1) of the GST Act provides that the information of the GST cannot be provided to third parties.
Section 158 (1) of the GST Act specifically prohibits giving information of GST returns except as provided in sub-section 3, so also Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act prohibits information which relates to personal. Section 158 (1) of the GST Act specifically prohibits giving information of GST returns except as provided in sub-section 3, so also Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act prohibits information which relates to personal.
Section 158 sub-clause (1) specifically provides that all particulars contained in any statement made, return furnished or accounts or documents produced in accordance with the GST Act, or in any record of evidence given in the course of any proceedings under the GST Act (other than the proceedings before a criminal court), or in any record of any proceedings under the GST Act shall, save as provided in sub-section (3) not be disclosed. Thus, the returns furnished by the industries under Section 158 (1) cannot be disclosed by the GST authorities except as provided in sub-section 3 of Section 158. GST ACT being a special enactment and a later enactment would override the RTI Act (general enactment) and the information which is prohibited to be provided under Section 158 of the GST Act cannot be disclosed under the RTI Act.
The court dismissed the writ petition and held that based on the reply the Authorities have not provided information of GST returns of the Industries as there is no larger public interest involved in the matter. Thus no case is made out under proviso to Section 8 (1) (j) to grant information.
Case Details
Case Title: Adarsh Versus The State of Maharashtra
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 11135 Of 2025
Date: 14.10.2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Maniyar Irfan D., Advocate
Counsel For Respondent: M.N. Ghanekar, Advocate
Read More: Bengaluru Airport Cracks Down on Wildlife Trafficking — 10,000 Animals Rescued, 9 Arrested
