Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| — | cases:vodafone-idea-v-cpc-2024 [2026/06/03 17:01] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{htmlmetatags> | ||
| + | metatag-description=(§245 IT adjustment without prior intimation is procedurally void. Case: Vodafone Idea Ltd v. CPC — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026. RTI Wiki — citizen-first reference.) | ||
| + | metatag-title=(Vodafone Idea Ltd v. CPC — 2024 — RTI case law)}} | ||
| + | ====== Vodafone Idea Ltd v. CPC — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026 ====== | ||
| + | **Vodafone Idea Ltd v. CPC** (Delhi High Court, 2024-03-14) //WP(C) 4567/2024// is a ruling on the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Section §245 ITA. §245 IT adjustment without prior intimation is procedurally void. Adjustment of refund against disputed demand under §245 of the Income Tax Act 1961 without proper prior intimation in writing is procedurally void. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Holding ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | §245 IT adjustment without prior intimation is procedurally void. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Ratio ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Adjustment of refund against disputed demand under §245 of the Income Tax Act 1961 without proper prior intimation in writing is procedurally void. Refund directed to be released with interest under §244A. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Section(s) applied ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Section §245 ITA | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Practitioner takeaway ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | §245 ITA + RTI for §245 intimation copy. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Citation ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * **Citation: | ||
| + | * **Court:** Delhi High Court | ||
| + | * **Date:** 2024-03-14 | ||
| + | * **Outcome: | ||
| + | * **Reporter / Cause-list: | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Why this case matters for citizens ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | This ruling is part of the **300+ case-law corpus** at [[: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Citizen action steps if your own RTI is being refused on similar grounds ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | - **Day 30** — silence by PIO = deemed refusal under §7(2). File §19(1) First Appeal in 30 days using [[https:// | ||
| + | - **Day 60-90** — if FAA also refuses, file §19(3) Second Appeal to the State Information Commission (or CIC for central authorities). | ||
| + | - **Beyond 18 months pending** — writ petition under Article 226 to the High Court. | ||
| + | - **Parallel CPGRAMS complaint** at pgportal.gov.in for service-delivery push. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Citing this ruling in your appeal ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Use our [[https:// | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Related landmark RTI rulings ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Related on RTI Wiki ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [[https:// | ||
| + | * [[https:// | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[:act|RTI Act, 2005]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Original case metadata — Related ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[:act|RTI Act, 2005 — full text]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | //Last reviewed: 23 April 2026.// {{tag> | ||