Page 66 - ELT_1_1st April 2020_Vol 372_Part

A40 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

that Directed Tax Departments and Financial institutions to defer recovery pro-
ceedings till April 6 in light of the coronavirus pandemic.
A Bench headed by Justice A.M. Khanwilkar took note of the submis-
sions of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Centre, that the
Kerala HC order needed to be stayed. Mehta said a similar order had been
passed by the Allahabad High Court, Explaining the case, Harpreet Singh, Tax
Partner at KPMG, said the Kerala HC, taking suo motu note of the prevailing
“precarious” situation of the pandemic, had directed the Income Tax Authorities,
authorities dealing with the Goods and Services Tax and Value-Added Tax, fi-
nancial institutions, banks, etc. to defer the recovery proceedings or coercive
measures till April 6.
The Kerala HC single judge Bench took note of the fact that Government
Departments are issuing recovery notices, compelling litigants to approach the
Court for interim stay. This is clogging the HC, leaving judges and lawyers and
Court Staff “vulnerable” to the coronavirus pandemic, he observed. The Kerala
HC said “... handling of the files by the High Court staff as well as the Advocate
General staff is done without proper precautions, as they are handled with bare
hands instead of using protective measures like gloves, etc....”
[Source : Business Standard, New Delhi, dated 21-3-2020]

Ruling against judicial transparency
A recent Supreme Court verdict has barred citizens from accessing court rec-
ords under the RTI Act
In its recent decision, in the Chief Information Commissioner v. High Court
of Gujarat case, the Supreme Court, regrettably, barred citizens from securing
access to Court records under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Instead, the
Court held that such records can be accessed only through the rules laid down
by each High Court under Article 225 of the Constitution. The Registry of the
Supreme Court was litigating a similar case (Registrar, Supreme Court of India v.
R.S. Misra) before the Delhi High Court for several years after the CIC had or-
dered it to provide copies of pleadings filed in a case, under the RTI Act, rather
than insisting on litigants filing an application under the Supreme Court Rules.
Though the particular decision taken earlier this month does not pre-
clude the application of the RTI Act to the administrative side of the Court, it
does firmly slam the door shut on accessing, under the RTI Act, the millions of
Court records filed on the judicial side.
Importance of sharing records
Before explaining the faults and the consequences with this decision of
the Supreme Court, it is necessary to understand the importance of Court records
to public discourse in India. A significant number of decisions taken by the
Courts influence our daily life. Every prosecution before a criminal Court is es-
sentially an opportunity to hold the police accountable just as every writ petition
is an opportunity to hold the Government accountable. Similarly, a significant
number of commercial lawsuits are opportunities to learn more about corpora-
tions and the manner in which commercial translations are executed in the coun-
try.
In all of these cases, the pleadings filed by either party contain reams of

EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st April 2020  114