Skip to main content

Charging GST on fees payable under RTI Act is blatantly illegal


By Venkatesh Nayak*
Ever since the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act) was brought into force in India, some public authorities have been creating pointless controversies by demanding GST on fees payable under The Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act). RTI applicants in Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra have reported such illegal demands from public authorities. According to media reports, GST demands have been embedded into the online RTI application filing facilities as well.
Such actions constitute brazen illegality. I have put together my arguments based on the evidence gathered from public sources for the benefit of readers in general and RTI users and activists in particular, who are at the receiving end of such malpractices.

GST Act itself exempts transactions and duties performed under the RTI Act

Section 7 of the GST Act states as follows:
” (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),––
(a) activities or transactions specified in Schedule III;…
…shall be treated neither as a supply of goods nor a supply of services.”
Para 3(b) of Schedule III [referred to in Section 7(2)(a) above] of the GST Act states as follows:
“ACTIVITIES OR TRANSACTIONS WHICH SHALL BE TREATED NEITHER AS A SUPPLY OF GOODS NOR A SUPPLY OF SERVICES
X X X X X
(b) the duties performed by any person who holds any post in pursuance of the provisions of the Constitution in that capacity;”
All Public Information Officers (PIOs) who are government servants at the Central level or in the States and the Union Territories are appointed under Article 309 of the Constitution. Therefore every duty they perform is essentially a duty performed under the Constitution. The RTI Act gives effect to the people’s fundamental right to know what the Government is doing which is guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. When a PIO processes and makes a decision on an RTI application, he or she is essentially performing a duty under the Constitution.
So the GST Act’s exemption will directly apply to the duties that PIOs perform under the RTI Act. This exemption will apply to First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) also who are government servants, wherever the State RTI Rules empower them to charge appeal fees. Therefore, it would be brazenly illegal to charge GST for providing access to information or deciding first appeals under the RTI Act.
That leaves us with public authorities whose employees are not government servants, namely those working in public sector banks, public sector enterprises and other non-government organisations that are recognised as “public authorities under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. So doubting Toms might say that such PIOs and FAAs can charge GST for giving information. Please read on to understand how they too cannot and must not charge GST at all.

Transactions under the RTI Act are specifically exempted from the GST regime since January, 2018

Section 7(2)(b) of the GST Act states as follows:
” (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),––
X X X X X
(b) such activities or transactions undertaken by the Central Government, a State Government or any local authority in which they are engaged as public authorities, as may be notified by the Government on the recommendations of the Council, shall be treated neither as a supply of goods nor a supply of services.”
Further, Section 11(1) of the GST Act empowers the Central Government to exempt specific activities from the payment of GST. Section 11 is reproduced below:
“11. (1) Where the Government is satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, it may, on the recommendations of the Council, by notification, exempt generally, either absolutely or subject to such conditions as may be specified therein, goods or services or both of any specified description from the whole or any part of the tax leviable thereon with effect from such date as may be specified in such notification.”
At its 25th meeting held on 18th January, 2018, the GST Council recommended inter alia that “supply of services by way of providing information under RTI Act, 2005 be exempted from GST.” (Click here for the minutes of the meeting). Soon after, a press note released through the Press Information Bureau, announced this recommendation to the citizenry (Click here for the PIB Press Note).
A week later, on 25th January, 2018, the Department of Revenue gave effect to this recommendation by exempting the applicability of GST to the supply of information under the RTI Act (Click here for the Gazette notification- see page #35).
So, now all public authorities under the RTI Act, whether within the public or the non-government sector are prohibited from charging GST for providing information under the RTI Act. This exemption will apply to First Appellate Authorities also wherever the State RTI Rules empower them to charge appeal fees. In my humble opinion RTI Rules that permit charging fees for appeals are themselves ultra vires of the RTI Act as there is no such empowering provision in the Act. However this is a subject matter of another debate, so I will not go into the detailed arguments on this issue.

Even Information Commissions cannot charge GST

Some State Governments have unfortunately made RTI Rules that permit Information Commissions to charge fees for entertaining second appeals. At last count (see page 98 of CHRI’s RTI User Guide), seven States, namely, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Odisha and Sikkim were on this list.
In such cases, GST will not be applicable as there is an express bar in the GST Act. Once again, Section 7 of the GST Act must be examined. Section 7(2) of the Act states as follows:
” (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),––
(a) activities or transactions specified in Schedule III;…
…shall be treated neither as a supply of goods nor a supply of services.”
Para 2 of Schedule III states as follows:
“ACTIVITIES OR TRANSACTIONS WHICH SHALL BE TREATED NEITHER AS A SUPPLY OF GOODS NOR A SUPPLY OF SERVICES
X X X X X
2. Services by any court or Tribunal established under any law for the time being in force.”
Information Commissions established under the RTI Act are decidedly Tribunals. They are not courts of law. According to Section 19(7) read with Section 23 of the RTI Act, their decisions are final and binding. Their decisions may be challenged only by invoking the powers of judicial review vested in the High Courts under Article 226 or by virtue of a Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. So Section 7 read with Schedule III and the action taken by the Central Government under Section 11(1) of the GST Act prevent Information Commissions from charging GST on appeals fees.

Penalty for wrongfully charging GST

All penalties for contraventions or offences recognised under the GST Act are imposable on taxable or registered persons. To the best of my knowledge there is no penalty on officers or employees of public authorities (GST experts may please correct me if I am wrong) – a typical trend of laws that are being enacted in recent years. However, there is a general penalty clause for contraventions not specifically recognised under the GST Act as follows:
“125. Any person, who contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or any rules made thereunder for which no penalty is separately provided for in this Act, shall be liable to a
penalty which may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees.”
However, Section 126 of the GST Act may come to the rescue of errant PIOs and FAAs as the sums of money wrongfully collected as GST are more often than not likely to be less than INR 5,000. Section 126 of the Act reads as follows:
“126. (1) No officer under this Act shall impose any penalty for minor breaches of tax regulations or procedural requirements and in particular, any omission or mistake in
documentation which is easily rectifiable and made without fraudulent intent or gross negligence.
Explanation.––For the purpose of this sub-section,––
(a) a breach shall be considered a ‘minor breach’ if the amount of tax involved is less than five thousand rupees;
(b) an omission or mistake in documentation shall be considered to be easily rectifiable if the same is an error apparent on the face of record.”
However, there are remedies under the RTI Act itself against such errant PIOs:
1) A complaint may be submitted to the concerned Information Commission against an errant PIO for charging unreasonable fees under Section 18(1)(d) of the RTI Act.
2) It is also possible in theory to argue that the PIO has charged GST illegally and therefore caused obstruction in the furnishing of information under the Act. This is a ground for imposing penalty under Section 20 of the RTI Act.
Will Information Commissioners be willing to impose penalty in such cases remains to be seen. Given the ambivalent track record of a large number of Information Commissions, this will be an uphill task.
3) However, every RTI applicant who has been charged GST under the RTI Act must demand compensation through the second appeal or complaint procedure so that the Information Commission may direct the concerned public authority to refund the GST amount paid. Please demand INR 1/- as a additional compensation in order to score a point against the public authority which has wrongfully charged GST from the RTI applicant.
It is important that the RTI fraternity in India opposes the illegal charging of GST on RTI matters in every case.

*Programme Coordinator, Access to Information Programme, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi

Comments

TRENDING

When democracy becomes a performance: The Tibetan exile experience

By Tseten Lhundup*  I was born in Bylakuppe, one of the largest Tibetan settlements in southern India. From childhood, I grew up in simple barracks, along muddy roads, and in fields with limited resources. Over the years, I have watched our democratic system slowly erode. Observing the recent budget session of the 17th Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile, these “democratic procedures” appear grand and orderly on the surface, yet in reality they amount to little more than empty formalities. The parliamentarians seem largely disconnected from the everyday struggles faced by ordinary exiled Tibetans like us.

Study links sanctions to 500,000 deaths annually leading to rise in global backlash

By Bharat Dogra  International opinion is increasingly turning against the expanding burden of sanctions imposed on a growing number of countries. These measures are contributing to humanitarian crises, intensifying domestic discord, and heightening international tensions, thereby increasing the risks of conflicts and wars. 

Dhurandhar: The Revenge — Blurring the line between fiction and political narrative

By Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan*  "Dhurandhar: The Revenge" does not wait to be remembered; it arrives almost on the heels of its predecessor, released on March 19, 2026, just months after the first film’s December 2025 debut. The speed of its arrival feels less like creative urgency and more like calculated timing—cinema responding not to storytelling rhythm but to the emotional climate of its audience. Director Aditya Dhar, along with actor Yami Gautam, appears acutely aware of this moment and how to harness it.

Beyond the island: Top mythologist reorients the geography of the Ramayana

By Jag Jivan   In a compelling new analysis that challenges conventional geographical assumptions about the ancient epic, writer and mythologist Devdutt Pattanaik has traced the roots of the Ramayana to the forests and river systems of Central and Eastern India, rather than the peninsular south or the modern island nation of Sri Lanka.

BJP accounts for 99% of political donations in Gujarat: Corporate giants dominate

By Jag Jivan   An analysis of the official data on donations received by national parties from Gujarat during the Financial Year 2024-25 reveals a staggering concentration of funding, with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) accounting for nearly the entirety of the contributions. The data, compiled in a document titled "National Parties donations received from Gujarat during FY-2024-25," lists thousands of transactions, painting a detailed picture of the financial backing for political parties from one of India’s most industrially significant states.

Alarming decline in India's repair culture threatens circular economy goals: Study

By Jag Jivan  A comprehensive new study by environmental research and advocacy organisation Toxics Link has painted a worrying picture of India's fading repair culture, warning that the trend towards replacement over repair is accelerating the country's already critical e-waste crisis.

Captains extraordinaire: Ranking cricket’s most influential skippers

By Harsh Thakor*  Ranking the greatest cricket captains is a subjective exercise, often sparking passionate debate among fans. The following list is not merely a tally of wins and losses; it is an assessment of leadership’s deeper impact. My criteria fuse a captain’s playing record with their tactical skill, placing the highest consideration on their ability to reshape a team’s fortunes and inspire those around them. A captain who inherited a dominant empire is judged differently from one who resurrected a nation’s cricket from the doldrums. With that in mind, here is my perspective on the finest leaders the game has ever seen.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

‘No merit’ in Chakraborty’s claims: Personal ethics talk sans details raises questions

By Jag Jivan  A recent opinion piece published in The Quint by Subhash Chandra Garg has raised questions over the circumstances surrounding the resignation of Atanu Chakraborty from HDFC Bank , with Garg stating that the exit “raises doubts about his own ‘ethics’.” Garg, currently Chief Policy Advisor at Subhanjali and former Secretary of the Department of Economic Affairs, Government of India, writes that the Reserve Bank of India ( RBI ) appears to find no substance in Chakraborty’s claims, noting, “It is clear the RBI sees no merit in Atanu Chakraborty’s wild and vague assertions.”