Information on FDI related to M/s. Brahma City Pvt. Ltd. & M/s. Brahma Centre Dev. Pvt. Ltd was denied u/s 8(1)(d) & (e) - Appellant claimed that these Companies had violated FEMA regulations- CIC: Denial upheld; FAA cautioned to be careful in future

ORDER

1. The appellant, Shri Mewa Singh Bedhian, submitted RTI application dated 12,08.2013 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai seeking information relating to FDI approval from RBI etc. and other Government departments concerned on four points relating to M/s Brahma City Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, M/s. Krrish Infrastructure Pt. Ltd., New Delhi, M/s. Krrish Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, M/s. Brahma Opportunities Pvt. Ltd., Mauritius, M/s, Krrish Realtech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, M/s. JM Asian Cyprus Ltd., Cyprus, M/s. Neptune Asian Cyprus Ltd., Cyprus, M/s. Brahma Krrish Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, M/s. Brahma Centre Development Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Brahma Opportunities Ltd., M/s. Brahma Opportunities Ltd., Mauritius, M/s. Brahma Opportunities D. Ltd., Mauritius, M/s. Brahma Opportunities B. Ltd., Mauritius, M/s. Brahma Communication Music Ltd., Mauritius and M/s. Brahma Long Equity Ltd., Mauritius.

2. The CPIO vide letter dated 12.09.2013 informed the appellant on Point 2(a) that FDI is reported by Indian companies in form FC-GPR to the Regional Offices of the RBI which in turn report this information to Foreign Exchange Department in the Central Office which maintains company-wise inflow details. The details of EC-GPR filings made by the Indian company with the Regional Office concerned of the RBI were held in fiduciary capacity and were not made public. Detailed information was then forwarded by the RBI to Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion (DIPP), Ministry of Commerce & Industry, GOI which classifies and consolidates sector-wise inflows and puts on the DIPP website, Deptt. of Industrial Policy & Promotion, GOI is the nodal agency for dissemination of this data. As per records of RBI only two companies viz. M/s. Brahma City Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Bramha Centre Development Pvt. Ltd. had received FDI under automatic route. Since these companies have reported FDI under Automatic route, no RBI permission was required to bring in funds in the form of financial capital. As per records M/s. Bramha Centre Development Pvt. Ltd. has received FDI inflows on account of transfer of shares as reported by AD bank (HDFC Bank). The documents required by the appellant were related to third party and exempt from disclosure u/s 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; and (e) of the RTI Act; On Point 2(b) the CPIO replied that the information with regard to formation of companies was not available with Foreign Exchange Deptt. of RBI. Further FDI is governed by FDI Policy of GOI. Indian companies do not require permission from RBI to receive FDI inflows under Automatic Route. However, they require FIPB approval to receive FDI inflows under Approval Route. Hence copies of documents were not available with RBI. Moreover the documents required were related to third party, and exempt u/s 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; and (e) of the RTI Act; In response to Point 3 the appellant was informed that M/s. Brahma City Pvt. Ltd. has received FDI inflows to the tune of Rs. 367.91 crores in the years 2012 and 2013 under automatic route. M/s. Bramha Centre Development Pvt. Ltd. had received FDI inflows to the tune of Rs. 451.47 crores in the years 2011 and 2012 under automatic route and inflow of Rs. 0.35 crore in the year 201 on account of transfer of shares; in response to Point 4 the appellant was informed that RBI did not have any information in the matter. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal on 3.10.2013 before the FAA. The FAA had not adjudicated on appellant’s first appeal.

3. Thereafter the appellant filed second appeal before the Commission.

4. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant stated that the respondents had denied information on FDI related to M/s. Brahma City Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Brahma Centre Development Pvt. Ltd under the provisions of Section 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; and (e) of the RTI Act. The appellant also stated that these Companies had violated FEMA regulations. The respondents stated that since these companies have reported FDI under Automatic Route, no RBI permission was required bring in funds in the form of financial capital. The form signed by the companies for getting FDI through automatic route having the details of location of the investor, his bank account number, how many years the company was holding the bank account, his address and other personal details of the investors, which could not be divulged to the appellant under the provisions of Section 8(1)(d) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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; and (e) of the RTI Act. The respondents already provided information to the appellant keeping in view the provisions of the RTI Act. The appellant requested to provide whatever other information as permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act. The respondents stated that whatever information available and permissible under the RTI Act had already been provided to the appellant.

5. Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Commission holds that the respondents had provided information as per available records and permissible under the RTI Act to the appellant. The forms signed by the respective companies having personal details of the respective companies cannot be provided to the appellant within the provisions of Section 8(1) (d) (e) & (j) of the RTI Act. The Commission finds no reason to intervene in the matter. The Commission however, notes that the FAA has failed to discharge the statutory duties assigned to him under the RTI Act of not disposing of the appellant’s first appeal. The Commission cautions the FAA to be careful while dealing with RTI matters in future. The appeal is disposed of.

(Manjula Prasher)

Information Commissioner

Citation: Shri Mewa Singh Bedhian v. Reserve Bank of India in Appeal: No. CIC/MP/A/2014/000520