been accepted by Shri Prasanta Sircar that he has given these items. Total worth of items in the chargesheet has been given as 40 lakhs.(Attached as Annexure- ) Because Smt. Moumita Sircar,Smt. Sirsha Sircar and Prasanta Sircar may not have paid any wealth tax on the jewellery items mentioned in the chargesheet if it is claimed that the jewellery was inherited. Please compute the assets including their flat at 102 Jodhpur Garden and the jewellery items for establishing the Wealth Tax Amount.( Section 3 of Wealth Tax Act prescribes that every individual /HUF, and company shall be liable to wealth tax,, if the amount of Net wealth exceeds 30 lakhs(AY- 2010-2011 onwards and 15 lakhs prior to AY 2010-2011). 3. BECAUSE, The appellant has enclosed a copy of relevant judgments before CP1O, along with original application which is a same kind of TEP / RTI matter related to dowry matter “Honorable High Court wide Decision No WP(C) No.3114/2007 (attached as annexure-8) |n view of the foregoing discussion the order of the CIC dated 8th May 2006 in so far as it withholds information until tax recovery orders are made, is set aside, The second and third respondents are directed to release the information sought, on the basis of the materials available and collected with them, within two weeks. ‘This Court takes a serious note of the two year delay in releasing information, the lack of adequate reasoning in the orders of the Public Information Officer and the Appellate Authority and the lack of application of mind in relation to the nature of information sought. The materials on record clearly show the lackadaisical approach of the second and third respondent in releasing the information sought. 4, BECAUSE, Honorable Chief Information Commissioner Shri Shailesh Gandhi Wide Decision No. CIC/LS/A/2009/000647/SG/5887 dated 14-12-2009 in TEP / RTI matter (attached as annexure-9) where he defines the concept Section 8(1)(h) of the Act provides- 8. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen,— {(h) information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Dr. NareshTrehan, one of the third parties, and the Department have relied on this ground of ‘exemption, Both parties have stated that as the process of assessment has not been finalized till date ‘and Investigation is still underway, exemption under Section 8(1)(h) applies. But the mere fact that an investigation is underway and that assessment has not been finalized is not a sufficient ground for the application of Section 8(1)(h).