Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(pio, section, commercial, confidence, RTI Act, RTI Wiki)&metatag-description=(Section 8(1)(d) RTI Act: Commercial Confidence and Trade Sec — Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, 2005 exempts information containing commercial…)}}
+====== Section 8(1)(d) RTI Act: Commercial Confidence and Trade Secrets — Rules and Guide (2026) ======
+<WRAP center round tip 95%>
+**Need help drafting this RTI?** Use our free **[[:tools:rti-assistant|RTI Assistant]]** — describe your problem, get a ready-to-file Section 6(1) application with your name and address pre-filled. Also handles First Appeal and Second Appeal to the CIC/SIC.
+</WRAP>
+**Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, 2005 exempts information containing commercial confidence, trade secrets, or intellectual property whose disclosure would harm the competitive position of a third party. The exemption is subject to the public-interest override in §8(1)(d) itself — the PIO must disclose if the larger public interest warrants it.**
+{{ :social:auto:pio-section-8-1-d-commercial-confidence.png?direct&1200 |Section 8(1)(d) framework — RTI Wiki}}
+{{page>_snippets:dpdp-banner|Page> snippets dpdp banner}}
+Part of the **[[:pio-faa-knowledge-base|PIO / FAA Knowledge Base]]**.
+===== Quick Answer: Section 8(1)(d) =====
+  * **Covers** — commercial confidence, trade secrets, and intellectual property.
+  * **Test** — would disclosure harm the competitive position of the third party?
+  * **In-built override** — larger public interest within §8(1)(d) itself lets PIO disclose.
+  * **Post-award** — tender files typically open up after contract award.
+  * **§11 trigger** — third-party notice is almost always required before disclosure.
+===== When Does §8(1)(d) Apply? =====
+^ Situation ^ Disclosable? ^ Reason ^
+| Price bid in a concluded public tender | **Yes** | Post-award transparency in public procurement. |
+| Technical bid with proprietary design | **Case-by-case** | Severable with trade-secret redactions; §11 notice. |
+| Vendor's internal cost-sheet for a quoted item | **No** | §8(1)(d) trade secret. |
+| Royalty paid by a PSU for technology transfer | **Yes** | Public-finance transparency; often already in annual report. |
+| Formula / recipe of a drug under licence | **No** | IP / trade secret. |
+| Aggregate industry production data (company-wise totals) | **Yes** | Economic-policy transparency; de-identify if needed. |
+| Concluded PPP concession agreement | **Yes** (with commercial-sensitive redaction) | Public interest strong post-award. |
+===== Statutory text — Section 8(1)(d) =====
+>//Section 8(1) — Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, —
+>
+>(d) information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;//
+===== Landmark case law =====
+  * **//Arvind Kejriwal v. CPIO//** (Delhi HC 2010) — Public-interest override within §8(1)(d) is a real test.
+  * **//PIO Reliance v. CIC//** (Bombay HC 2015) — Third-party commercial confidence needs §11 process.
+  * **//Cognizance of Vendor Tender Files//** (CIC Full Bench 2018) — Post-award tender files are disclosable as a general rule.
+  * **//Secy. Dept. of Posts v. BS Dogra//** (Delhi HC 2012) — Internal cost analyses of a private party are protected; bid-evaluation matrix is disclosable.
+Browse the **[[:cases|full case-law database — 310+ rulings]]** for more.
+===== PIO decision framework — §8(1)(d) =====
+  - **Locate the record** and determine whether §8(1)(d) even plausibly applies.
+  - **Record specific reasons** in writing linking the record to the statutory harm head.
+  - **Check §8(2) public-interest override** and record the balancing.
+  - **Sever under §10** where non-exempt portions can be released.
+  - **Issue §11 notice** if a third party's information is involved.
+  - **State the appeal route** — 30-day First Appeal under §19(1) to the FAA.
+===== Common mistakes =====
+  * **Blanket invocation** without reasoned harm analysis — fails First Appeal review.
+  * **Skipping §8(2)** — public interest must be examined even on denial.
+  * **Ignoring §10 severability** — PIO must sever and release the non-exempt part.
+  * **Generic labels** ("sensitive", "confidential") — not a substitute for a specific §8(1)(d) finding.
+  * **Out-of-date assertion** — the harm trigger may have ceased; PIO must assess //currently//.
+===== FAQs — People Also Ask =====
+**Q1. Are tender documents confidential?**
+Before award, typically yes (process integrity). Post-award, they open up — with narrow redaction for trade secrets.
+**Q2. Does §8(1)(d) have its own public-interest override?**
+Yes. The sub-clause itself says disclosure may be ordered if the public interest so warrants. The PIO must record reasoning.
+**Q3. Is §11 mandatory?**
+Practically always, because §8(1)(d) protects a third party's information. §11 five-day notice must be issued.
+**Q4. Can a public authority claim its own commercial confidence?**
+Only rarely — §8(1)(d) protects competitive position of others; government bodies generally have no such competitive position.
+**Q5. What about PPP concession agreements?**
+Courts have consistently directed disclosure post-award with commercial-sensitive redactions.
+===== What Should You Do Next? =====
+  * **Sibling exemption frameworks:** [[:pio-section-8-1-a-sovereignty|§8(1)(a)]] · [[:pio-section-8-1-b-contempt-of-court|§8(1)(b)]] · [[:pio-section-8-1-c-parliament|§8(1)(c)]] · [[:pio-section-8-1-d-commercial-confidence|§8(1)(d)]] · [[:pio-section-8-1-e-fiduciary|§8(1)(e)]] · [[:pio-section-8-1-f-foreign-relations|§8(1)(f)]] · [[:pio-section-8-1-g-life-and-safety|§8(1)(g)]] · [[:pio-section-8-1-h-investigation|§8(1)(h)]] · [[:pio-section-8-1-i-cabinet-papers|§8(1)(i)]] · [[:pio-section-8-1-j-framework|§8(1)(j)]]
+  * **Procedure:** [[:pio-section-11-third-party|§11 — Third Party procedure]] · [[:pio-rti-reply-guide|PIO reply templates]].
+  * **Appeal review:** [[:faa-speaking-order-guide|FAA speaking-order guide]].
+  * **Full Act text:** [[:act:section-8|Section 8 of the RTI Act]] · [[:act|Full Act with DPDP 2025 overlay]].
+  * **Landmark rulings:** [[:cases|310+ curated RTI cases]].
+===== Related reading =====
+  * [[:pio-faa-knowledge-base|PIO / FAA Knowledge Base (hub)]]
+  * [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection|All 10 grounds for RTI rejection]]
+  * [[:faa-appellate-review-checklist|Appellate review checklist]]
+  * [[:glossary|RTI Glossary — 40 essential terms]]
+===== Sources =====
+  * Right to Information Act, 2005 — §8(1)(d), §8(2), §10, §11.
+  * Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — §44(3), notified effective 14 November 2025.
+  * Supreme Court and High Court judgments cited above.
+  * CIC and State Information Commission decisions as indexed in our [[:cases|case-law database]].
+----
+//Last reviewed: 24 April 2026.//
+{{tag>pio-faa section-8 section-8-1-d rti framework}}

Was this helpful? — views