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

Manufacturing, services: India's low-skill, middle-skill labour remains underemployed

By Francis Kuriakose* The Indian economy was in a state of deceleration well before Covid-19 made its impact in early 2020. This can be inferred from the declining trends of four important macroeconomic variables that indicate the health of the economy in the last quarter of 2019.

The soundtrack of resistance: How 'Sada Sada Ya Nabi' is fueling the Iran war

​ By Syed Ali Mujtaba*  ​The Persian track “ Sada Sada Ya Nabi ye ” by Hossein Sotoodeh has taken the world by storm. This viral media has cut across linguistic barriers to achieve cult status, reaching over 10 million views. The electrifying music and passionate rendition by the Iranian singer have resonated across the globe, particularly as the high-intensity military conflict involving Iran entered its second month in March 2026.

Incarceration of Prof Saibaba 'revives' the question: What is crime, who is criminal?

By Kunal Pant* In 2016, a Supreme Court Judge asked the state of Maharashtra, “Do you want to extract a pound of flesh?” The statement was directed against the state for contesting the bail plea of Delhi University Professor GN Saibaba. Saibaba was arrested in 2014, a justification for which was to prevent him from committing what the police called “anti-national activities.”

Food security? Gujarat govt puts more than 5 lakh ration cards in the 'silent' category

By Pankti Jog* A new statistical report uploaded by the Gujarat government on the national food security portal shows that ensuring food security for the marginalized community is still not a priority of the state. The statistical report, uploaded on December 24, highlights many weaknesses in implementing the National Food Security Act (NFSA) in state.

Why Indo-Pak relations have been on 'knife’s edge' , hostilities may remain for long

By Utkarsh Bajpai*  The past few decades have seen strides being made in all aspects of life – from sticks and stones to weaponry. The extreme case of this phenomenon has been nuclear weapons. The menace caused by nuclear weapons in the past is unforgettable. Images of Hiroshima and Nagasaki from 1945 come to mind, after the United States dropped two atomic bombs on the cities.

Lata Mangeshkar, a Dalit from Devdasi family, 'refused to sing a song' about Ambedkar

By Pramod Ranjan*  An artist is known and respected for her art. But she is equally, or even more so known and respected for her social concerns. An artist's social concerns or in other words, her worldview, give a direction and purpose to her art. History remembers only such artists whose social concerns are deep, reasoned and of durable importance. Lata Mangeshkar (28 September 1929 – 6 February 2022) was a celebrated playback singer of the Hindi film industry. She was the uncrowned queen of Indian music for over seven decades. Her popularity was unmatched. Her songs were heard and admired not only in India but also in Pakistan, Bangladesh and many other South Asian countries. In this article, we will focus on her social concerns. Lata lived for 92 long years. Music ran in her blood. Her father also belonged to the world of music. Her two sisters, Asha Bhonsle and Usha Mangeshkar, are well-known singers. Lata might have been born in Indore but the blood of a famous Devdasi family...

'Batteries now cheap enough for solar to meet India's 90% demand': Expert quotes Ember study

By A Representative   Shankar Sharma, Power & Climate Policy Analyst, has urged India’s top policymakers to reconsider the financial and ecological implications of the country’s energy transition strategy in light of recent global developments. In a letter dated April 10, 2026, addressed to the Union Ministers of Finance, Power, New & Renewable Energy, Environment, Forest & Climate Change, and the Vice Chair of NITI Aayog, with a copy to the Prime Minister, Sharma highlighted concerns over India’s ambitious plans for coal gasification and the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR).

Beyond Lata: How Asha Bhosle redefined the female voice with her underrated versatility

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*  The news of iconic Asha Bhosle’s ‘untimely’ demise has shocked music lovers across the country. Asha Tai was 92 years young. Normally, people celebrate a passing at this age, but Asha Bhosle—much like another legend, Dev Anand—never made us feel she was growing old. She was perhaps the most versatile artist in Bombay cinema. Hailing from a family devoted to music, Asha’s journey to success and fame was not easy. Her elder sister, Lata Mangeshkar, had already become the voice of women in cinema, and most contemporaries like Shamshad Begum, Suraiya, and Noor Jehan had slowly faded into oblivion. Frankly, there was no second or third to Lata Mangeshkar; she became the first—and perhaps the only—choice for music directors and all those who mattered in filmmaking. Asha started her musical journey at age 10 with a Marathi film, but her first break in Hindustani cinema came with the film "Chunariya" (1948). Though she was not the first choice of ...

50 years of the Port of Spain miracle: The chase that redefined Indian cricket

By Harsh Thakor*  Fifty years ago, India turned the tide to rewrite cricket history, rising from the depths of despair to a moment of enduring glory. Queen’s Park Oval in Port of Spain, Trinidad, is celebrated among cricket grounds for its poetic beauty. For India, it became a theatre of historic triumph. In 1976, it showed the cricketing world what it was made of.