* CHRONICLE - PENSIONERS CONVERGE HERE, DISCUSS ISSUES OF THEIR CHOICE * CHRONICLE - WHERE EVEN THE CHAT COLUMN PRODUCES GREAT DISCUSSIONS * CHRONICLE - WHERE THE MUSIC IS RISING IN CRESCENDO !

               
                                   

Sunday, July 27, 2014

Re: filing returns

How-costly-can-the-delay-in-filing-tax-returns-be.

Due date for Filing Income Tax Return for Assessment Year 2014-15 for  Salaried Persons and other Assessees who are engaged in business and profession and whose turnover is less than  Rs. 100 lakh (in the case of business) and Rs 25 lakh (in the case of profession) is 31st July 2014.  In this article we have detailed in the form of Question answers Consequences of Delay in Filing Return of Income or of Filing Return after the due date.
Question:-First, what are the due dates?
Answer:- Assessees having income from salary have to file return of income before July 31 of the assessment year. This is the `due date’ prescribed in section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Self-employed businessmen and professionals, and those deriving
income from let-out property too have to file their returns by this date.
However, businessmen and professionals with aggregate turnover/annual receipt exceeding Rs 100 lakh (in the case of business) and Rs 25 lakh (in the case of profession) have time up to September 30 for filing their return of income.
Question:-Are there any benefits in filing by the due date?
Anwer:- An assessee filing return by the `due date’ provided in the statute is eligible to file a revised return if he discovers any omission or wrong statement therein. Time limit for filing revised return is one year from the end of the assessment year or before completion of assessment. No penalty would be levied for filing a revised return on voluntary basis.
Question:-So, by filing late, does one lose the revision option?
Answer:- Yes. If an assessee does not file his return within the `due date’ and files his return subsequently, he cannot have the benefit of revising the return, as the return filed beyond the `due date’ is treated as `belated return’.
Question:-Any other advantages of sticking to the deadline?
Answer:-The taxpayer gets the advantage of carry forward and set off of losses, such as loss from business and loss under the head `capital gains’. If the return is filed beyond the `due date’ mentioned in section 139(1), these losses cannot be carried and set off against the income of subsequent years.
Yet another advantage of filing return before `due date’ is the eligibility for interest ontax refund from April 1 of the assessment year.
Question:-Can delay, therefore, be wasteful for `refund’ cases?
Answer:-Yes, because where the return is filed after the `due date’, interest on refund is paid only for the period from the month of filing the return to the date of refund. In other words, no interest is paid for the period from April 1 of the assessment year to the date of filing the `belated return’.
Question:-Do those with `nil’ tax liability have anything to fear?
Answer:-Where the return is filed beyond the `due date’, the taxpayer has to pay interest if any, on tax liability existing beyond tax deducted at source (TDS) or tax collected at source (TCS) or the advance tax paid. The question of interest does not arise where tax due for payment is `nil’, as would be in the case of most salaried people who pay their taxes through the TDS route. Legally, a taxpayer can file his return before the end of the assessment year without any penalty (however with penal interest under section 234A). Again, the question of penal interest does not arise in the `nil’ cases discussed above. For the assessment year 2014-15, return of income could be filed up to March 31, 2015.
Question:-How costly can delay in filing IT return be?
Answer:-Apart from interest and penal interest, there are other implications. If the return is filed after March 31, 2015 but before March 31, 2016 the AO (Assessing Officer) could levy a penalty of Rs 5,000 under section 271F. Even when there is no further tax payable on the income admitted, penalty under section 271F is leviable for the delay. If the return is filed after March 31, 2016 then such return would become an invalid return.
- See more at: http://taxguru.in/income-tax/how-costly-can-the-delay-in-filing-tax-returns-be.html#sthash.sf2rMkcm.dpuf
(RK SAHNI)

The bright days ahead !

Taking cue from the wishes of Sri KK Sheri, HK Aggarwal, and Jalaramaiahji, I join all of them to wish all the best in his battle for the ultimate victory.

desire to support Asthanaji's Intervention application to Supreme Court in the matter of  C.A. NO. 9223 OF 2013. His efforts to protect the interest of all sections of the pensioners from the hands of those who have been shedding crocodile tears for only a section of the pensioners knowing it well that their efforts will not bring any justice for any of the pensioners.  

Subir Kumar Mazumder

Just a minute off...

a reassurance of support...
Hats off to you for your determination and perseverance !
We stand by you and pray for your success.
  
K.K.Sheri



DEAR ASTHANAJI,

IT IS A HARD FACT THAT YOUR DETERMINATION & PERSEVERANCE HAVE NO MATCH AND I PRAY GOD TO CONTINUE  TO  SHOWER HIS BLESSINGS UPON YOU AND KEEP YOU IN GOOD HEALTH ALWAYS TO CARRY ON THE  LEGAL FIGHT TILL FINAL VICTORY AND ALL PENSIONERS ENJOY THE FRUITS OF YOUR UNFAILING EFFORTS WHICH HAVE BEEN CONSISTENTLY SUPPORTED BY AIRIEF & ALL PENSIONERS IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR CLASS CADRE OR AFFILIATION.

WITH BEST WISHES AND REGARDS
HK AGGARWAL
MOHALI,CHANDIGARH.

DEAR SHRI.AGGARWAL JI
I FULLY ENDORSE YOUR VIEW.IT IS A WELL KNOWN FACT FOR ALL OUR PENSIONERS TO SEE AND APPRECIATE EXCEPT THOSE VESTED INTERESTS AMONG US WHOSE VISION IS BLURRED BY PREJUDICES,SELFISH MOTIVES OF HIJACKING THE INITIATIVES AND CRAVING FOR WINDFALL CREDIT.
WITH WARM REGARDS
JALARAMAIAH

THANK YOU SIR

KML ASTHANA
42A MOTI NAGAR,
GUJAR KI THADI, GOPALPURA BYEPASS
JAIPUR-302019

E-Filing - Do's and Don't

Impact of Errors made while filing returns 

Returns can be classified as defective u/s 139 (9) and in some scenarios the return can be declared in valid / Non Est. ITD is not introducing this concept to cover certain types of errors in order to prevent future grievances
Computation Errors - In electronic filing it has been noticed that most of the errors are due to data errors as filed by the assessee This includes non filling of key schedules, wrong details etc resulting in rectification requests etc which delay closure of processing
Inability to pay refunds to the assessee.  

Key rules to be followed to ensure trouble free processing 

Once E filing is done (without digital signature), ITR V needs to be sent in time to CPC. In case ITR V acknowledgement is not received within reasonable time, the assessee may call up the CPC call centre to verify status Nearly 10% of assessees have failed to send the ITR V to CPC after E filing.

Assessee needs to fill his email address, mobile no correctly to ensure appropriate communication from the Income Tax Department. The use of the Tax practioner/CA's email address may not be appropriate.  

The assessee should make sure the correct (latest) address, bank account, MICR no. is filled.  

The assessee should verify tax credits available in Form26AS/NSDL websites. Mismatches are the single largest cause of incorrect tax computation. Non credits may be taken up with the TDS deductor and/or the banker as soon as they are noticed.

Saturday, July 26, 2014

Shape of things to come...

My dear Sir,


             Re :  ' I ' BETWEEN ' RUN ' & 'RUIN ' ?  NEVER !

You have wisely given the above thought-provoking concept at the right time !

As often repeated, it is " NOW !" OR " NEVER !" .

It is the fervent wish & hope of the entire pensioner fraternity that all the
stake-players in the field realise this before it is too late, iron out any small
differences in approach, shed the " I " and work in unison to achieve the
common goal of  RECTIFICATION OF DA/DR ANOMALY  &  REVISION OF PENSION
and deserve the gratitude of the dwindling group, by helping them to live
a life of self-dependence with dignity in the remaining short span of their 
lives !

Let us not do anything which negates the series of wins achieved over more
than a decade under the proficient captaincy of Shri K.M.L.Asthana !

The efforts of AIRIEF in supporting the legal battle spear-headed by Shri K.M.L.
Asthana at Jaipur and the late Shri M.L.Gandhi at Chandigarh, ever since its 
6th General Council Meeting held at Jabalpur during February, 2008,  and its
efforts to apprise the Leaders of the ruling political establishment deserve
the whole-hearted acclaim from everyone of us !

With best regards,
 A.BALASUBRAMANYA

Shape of things to come...



" Shape of things to come, be forewarned & forearmed, Win we MUST "

The article ( like his other contributions ) by the VP, AIRIEF Shri R. B. Kishoreji has covered all vital issues of pension updation, DA/DR cases pending in various courts in a nut shell. He has also touched the critical aspects of pension related issues of the PSBs and the RBI. He has tried to caution pensioners of PSBs and RBI while cautioning pensioners of LIC. The article is precise, yet comprehensive worth reading more than once/twice for better understanding, appreciation. The article is refreshing, soothing as well.

" Shape of things to come, be forewarned & forearmed, Win we MUST", the article has been predictably green- signalled (the caption is in green) by the Editor. " Win we MUST, YES, LIC PENSIONERS WOULD WIN and would set a precedent for pensioners of other institutions / organisations.



SN ( a 1992 pensioner )



Dear friends,

D-Day is coming. Beware the ides of August. Our Motherland’s 
Independence day is on August 15th, 67th Anniversary. Freedom 
from foreign British rule, we really became true Indian citizens, 
breathing fresh air of liberty, equality & fraternity & 
feeling elated with the aroma of Patriotism. Did we not say & 
articulate in ever so many briefs, replies,charts, rejoinders, 
dissertations, clarifications that we are Indians 1st & 
Indians last, we are LICians 1st & LICians last, we are 
Pensioners 1st & Pensioners last? 

We had pride in our profession & we were & are proud of our organization, which won accolades from every quarter,undiluted ,unadulterated praise & tribute. LIC is still the darling of the masses, milch cow for Government, Rock of Gibralter, undeclared Navratna & an economic Tajmahal. A distinct & unique institution must be able to summon courage to penetrate the veils of bureaucracy & render unto pensioners what pensioners richly deserve. 

It is not for the asking we want pension upgradation. It is not for the asking we plead for end of discrimination to grant Full DR to pre-8/1997 pensioners who were left in the lurch. Let a hundred flowers bloom, similarly a 1000 & more articles, spicy, juicy, littered with facts & figures, right & left beaming, virtually of 24/7 news & views, legal jargons & vocabulary made easy, ears & eyes glued to ongoing legal battle, real Kurukshetra battle, getting prolonged without rhyme or reason with ever so many formidable victories in many Courts, verdicts pronounced by eminent Hon Judges, a real Discovery of LIC pensioners fortitude &bravery, patience & endurance, support from so many angles & quarters, & Sensor & Radiator Calicut blog LIC PENSIONERS CHRONICLE always there to update, blowing the bugle & the trumpet, like a running commentary. Whether, Whither are the questions to be answered like in a puzzle or scrabble.

2)  Look at the Editorial in HM, VETERAN July 2014 by GS, IOBRA of Indian Overseas Bank

“Dear Friends! This issue carries news on two important developments. The first is that the IBA, during the course of ongoing bipartite talks, informed representatives of negotiating organisations that they are favourably inclined to consider the demand of extending 100% DA for all pensioners and the same is awaiting the approval of the Government. We do not have information about the effective date of extending 100% DR neutralisation to pre-2002 retirees. Rumours are circulating thickly that that it is likely to be prospective and not retrospective. Efforts are on to make us believe that IBA may condescend to give effectfrom1-11-2012 andwe should be satisfied with this gesture. We want to remind ourselves that denial of 100% DR neutralisation to pre-2002 retirees was and continues to be a great injustice and discrimination. This announcement has come after a prolonged fight by all retirees and especially by IOBRA in various forums. You may recollect that our SLP is pending before supreme Court. Since this is only a rectification of an anomaly created in the Eighth Bipartite agreement and ending discrimination meted out to senior retirees, we reasonably expect IBA to act gracefully and implement this with retrospective effect from 01-05-2005. We appeal to all the negotiating Unions and Associations to secure justice for senior retirees.

The second development is a historic one. The Government of India has given in-principle agreement to implement Pension Updation in Reserve Bank of India. We are happy about this development. But, the Government has put some riders to this sanction. They have given it as a package stating that henceforth the Salary Revision as well as updation in RBI will be once in 10 years. The second rider is that the method of revising Basic Pension will be the one followed for the government Pensioners.This will result in an anomaly in that the method adopted for revision of Basic pension will be different from the method adopted for wage revision. This will in turn result in different Basic pension for persons of same rank/service but with different date of retirement.Thus the exercise of Pension updation will not meet with the desired purpose. Further, the offer to change the periodicity of wage revision from the present 5 years to 10 years may not be feasible and unacceptable to the serving employees' organizations.
As RBI and PSB employees have similar pattern and periodicity of wage revision ,if a similar package is handed over to us, a similar chaotic situation will descend on bank retirees of PSBs also. Therefore it is necessary that the bank employees and officers as well as Bank retirees define and demand Pension updation as follows.

• The method adopted for refixation of Basic Pay in the new scale for arriving at the new Basic Pension for pensioners should be the same as adopted for revising and refixing Basic pay for the serving employees which is the method of point to point/stage to stage fixation from old scale to revised scale.
• Similarly the periodicity of Pension updation should also be once in every five years along with salary Revision for serving employees and the date of effect of Pension updation should also be the same date of effect of salary revision of serving employees.
• In the case of Pensioners who retired during the currency of earlier Bipartite settlement/s the components of "Pay" drawn on the preceding ten months of service prior to retirement, which were considered for the purpose of calculating Basic pension, should be refixed in the revised scales of pay implemented during subsequent bipartite wage settlement/s, adopting the method of point to point/stage to stage fixation notionally and revised Basic Pension to be implemented as a result of Pension updation should be recalculated.

We are informed by representatives of negotiating organizations who are participating in the ongoing bipartite talks, that as regards updation of pension, IBA was apprehensive about the same since it involves substantial financial burden to the Banks.
So we have a lot of work to do, lobbying with various interest groups like GOI, IBA as well as representatives of negotiating organizations UFBU and convince everyone and bring them to accept our view point. We have miles to go before we sleep. Let us March forward. Victory is ours. With Regards and love,Dr. B. Ramji, Editor/General Secretary IOBRA ”

3)  Institutions are compelling the pensioners to move from pillar to post. MOF/UOI is oblivious to the needs of pensioners. Courts are sentinels of justice & equity & even they do not discharge their true obligations, especially in the background of rich & result-yielding developments, the original purpose of the Writ having been inked positively with a salutary Jaipur Judgement affirming the TWIN BENEFITS & echoed & confirmed by Chandigarh & Delhi HCs with a positive version wanting to grant these benefits deservedly to all pensioners with 12% interest too. All pensioners federations are not still wanting to display or announce esspiritde corps, sportsmanship spirit with an UNANIMOUS & ONE VOICE of all pensioners before the Hon SC Bench on 12th or 19th August to impress forcefully & graphically the developments, the point of discrimination & the veracity of pronouncements in favour of pension revision with every wage revision One tree makes 1 Lakh match sticks.
But one matchstick can burn 1 Lakh trees.
Similarly, one negative thought or doubt can burn thousands of dreams… Why are you waiting for an auspicious day, announce true & right intentions now itself.

4)  Chandigarh CCP to 27 Jan 2015, but 4 weeks time to LIC for calculations. Same Jaipur rigmarole should not be allowed to be repeated. Alertness must be there when LIC deposits the amount. In fact, we were interested in looking at implementation & not any reenactment of the drama, as we quoted many cases, where in CCP also, Courts have ordered the institutions to implement with a time frame. Why, Sri T. Sampath Iyengar’s latest insertion in Chronicle confirms that, so end result can come even in CCP.
So too, Jaipur case which came up on 21 July ended with postponement & though LIC wanted 2 weeks time, now 25 August 2014 is the date given for hearing. SC Bench alone looks to be the last straw & the real Saviour

5)  Portents will be ominous, if after all this 14 years of struggle, the grave deaths of pensioners so large in numbers, Family pensioners jumping from 16 % to 36 % of Regular pensioners, LIC SLPs having been dismissed on 8 Aug 2013, historic 30 Sep, 2013 verdict of SC Bench, in spite of LIC efforts to ditch the judgement itself, emphatic & perhaps empathetic ,NO STAY verdict by Hon SC Bench but only starved of full benefits to pensioners by condoning delay, unpardonable 6 months & 23 days & the result proliferation of further SLPs converted as CAs , which 3 of Jaipur, Chandigarh & Delhi will come for a historic Sound & Light show on that august August Day. Postponements have again become the order of the day & that too long postponements defeating the very ends of justice. Hope not in August. We are not living in a fools paradise. Sr Counsels wit & wisdom, sparkling presentations, convincing arguments, pithy & stark data support of pensioners, powerful rebuttals, a tribute to Judiciary always coming to the rescue of befitting alienated, discriminated, disadvantaged elders & pensioners, longest wait for the Final dispassionate Judgement must ensure from the mouth of the venerable & Hon SC Bench. Lot of spadework, Note to Sr Counsel, why Sr Counsel be selected without delay, already valuable time lost, please touch your Conscience & atleast now, submerge Egos, difference between RUN & RUIN is I, let Pensioners feel the coming of good times, to handshake & embrace one another, convert Paradise Lost to Paradise Regained.

6)  High hopes are kindled by the overwhelming majority of BJP by itself & with alliance of NDA partners & above all the image of worthy PM, who has already initiated many reforms from many angles. Plus all Ministers appear to be alert & all are catching the attention of the media by some announcements. OROP was & is an excellent theme & ideal for parity & prepoll shibboleths & grandiose manifestos must not fade into insignificance. How many Fedns have met how many MPs, how many Ministers in the last 2 months with Memorandums & shawls & boquets. All India Confederation of Trade Unions comprising the largest segment also met FM. Fine, needed as a tool & strategy to prepare fresh ground, break the ice, to garner support, to impress FM &others to advise bureaucrats properly & in right spirit in consonance with past developments portrayed in Memorandum. More so, if this Govt seen to be enabling, suffused with enthusiasm & even euphoria cannot see the Core point in Court developments, that too dragging for decade & more, knowing the Institution ins & outs so well & performing such a purposeful, laudable & predominant role in Indian economy & for financial inclusion the all embracing theme of any party & more so in NDA Agenda, should they not condescend to approve in toto our strong case of pensioners with realistic , modest & genuine demands, who else will ? Not only that, if PMs advice is to resolve all grievances of citizens travel, children & ladies, elders & Sr Citizens etc within 2 months, & if Law Minister loudly & clearly asserts that National Litigation Policy will be taken seriously, delays will be considerably curtailed, not to interfere with the independence of the Judiciary, why not ours be a Test case for reality check. Then don’t impose the once in 10 years rule being cooked up for pension upgradation, as we lose the step by step difference once in 5 years, ie 60 months & next wait again once in 10 years. True, 10 year jump will be low to high whereas 5 year jump will be stable. May be MOF knows that many will die during that 10 year period & so save !! Why, Family Pensioners, ipso facto will have to wait for 10 year period & FPs will also lose 6th to 10th year. Why perpetrate suchies again. If you want as MOF to assert, clean your tables 1st, set your house in order, all packages of perquisites endeavour to introduce uniformity, bureaucrats enjoy maximum in service & out of service too.
Did you not cleverly introduce through the backdoor GRADE PAY concept, which is enveloping all CODemands, as Govt & RBI were the 1st to do. When it is known that scales of pay are rising so high, how to grant % increase, sabash, Grade Pay comes to the rescue, what a component. Look how high it is & eligible for all benefits. But poor plight of pensioners will be crushed with your might. How long himsa & adharma can last ?

7)  Friends, one more recent development has added to our proud arsenal yet another Brahmastra, the dismissal of LIC SLP by SC Bench in M.C Jain Retd RM Accts, also a Jaipur case, also a Hon Bhandaris verdict, dismissal of LIC appeal earlier, LIC deliberately kept it pending as they knew if they accept this, necessarily & by compulsion, they have to accept & implement the double-decker or pension in chain upgradation, as by asking LIC to implement their orders, Officers retired between 1/8/92 to 31/3/ 93 will have to be refixed in revised pay after 1/8/92-31/7/97 wage agreement, get the arrears for the few months till date of retirement PLUS refixation of pension as per New Pay scales for their cadres in Class I, get the difference between old lesser pension which was as per old scales of pay, & the new higher pension warranted by new scales of pay, with correct DR calculated & all such differences for nearly DOR to say 31 August, 2014 , for a long period of 21 years, assuming August as a Victory month after due acceptance by LIC without in any way acquiescing in the situation to abort or subvert. That will fail, as earlier all officers retired 1/8/92—31/7/94 received substantial arrears of Gratuity for 1993 to 2/2008 & 9/2008 as I wrote in an earlier but recent Chronicle contribution.
This salient but sound judgement also must open the ground for Pension upgradation successively & must be driven home to eminent SC Bench with aplomb, pinpoint precision & penetrative arguments to put down LIC Counsel & when many times hitherto, LIC even when driven to a corner, was able to come up as a Sphinx & that must be nipped in the bud in the decisive battle in 3rd week of August

8)  Lastly, prospective will be a gloom. DR difference has to be from the date when discrimination arose, viz 1/8/1997 as post 8/97 get Full DR. OROP also SC was strict & compelled Govt to fix 1/1/2006 as effective date & not 9/2012. Our blood boils when we notice the huge loss in DR Slabs all through, poor Seniors of Seniors are losing regularly. If Politicians burn effigies, all pensioners must burn the cruel, gruelling, miserly, unconstitutional APPENDIX IV Formula of LIC Pension Rules 1995 on that victorious day. So too, when we see & look around 9 cadres below get more pension than such high level cadres, it is a much much bigger loss. After LIC Board Resolution charter date 1/8/2002 or 1/1/2007 CWP 654/2007 on pension upgradation effective date can be claimed as 1/1/2007 atleast. Have you seen the Retirement benefit chart, then & now & going up & up ? We have to hang our heads in shame how we tolerated & how we eked our existence, honestly. Respected Pradhana Mantri Modiji slogan Acche din anewale hai has already come for existing employees with a charter yet to be unfolded & resolved. When are we getting, how are we going to get by traversing the last lap of our journey with complete resonance & vibration of ideas with similarity & unanimity & above all dealing on that memorable Day with a heart & mind full of elixir & glory. Shine & Sparkle, Smile & bring Cheers & Dimples on faces of all pensioners.
Greetings,

R.B.KISHORE
VP,AIRIEF

What is e-Filing ?

What is e-Filing? 

 The process of electronically filing Income tax returns through the internet is known as e- Filing. 

e-Filing of Returns/Forms is mandatory for : 

  • Any assessee having total income of Rs 5 Lakhs and above for from AY 2013- 14 and subsequent Assessment Years. 
  • Individual/ HUF, being resident, having assets located outside India from AY 2012-13 and subsequent Assessment Years. 
  • An assessee required to furnish a report of audit specified under sections  10(23C)(iv), 10(23C)(v),10(23C)(vi) ,10(23C)(via) , 10A, 12A(1)(b), 44AB,  80-IA, 80-IB, 80-IC, 80-ID, 80JJAA, 80LA, 92E or 115JB of the Act, shall furnish the said report of audit and the return of Income electronically from AY 2013-14 and subsequent Assessment Years. 
  • An assessee required to give a notice under Section 11(2)(a) to the  Assessing Officer from AY 2014-15 and subsequent Assessment Years. 
  • All companies. 
  • Firm (to whom provisions of section 44AB is not applicable), AOP, BOI, Artificial Juridical Person , Co-operative Society and Local Authority required to file ITR 5 from AY 2014-15 and subsequent Assessment Years. 
  •  An assessee required to furnish return u/s 139 (4B) in ITR 7. 
  • A resident who has signing authority in any account located outside India. 
  • A person who claims relief under sections 90 or 90A or deduction under section 91. 

Compulsory / Mandatory E filing of Return with digital signature and without digital signature

Compulsory e filing of Income Tax return with or without digital signature

compulsory e filing of Income Tax return without digital signature Ay 14-15
Sr No
Person
ITR FORM
Description
1
All persons (except company and where return is filed on ITR-7)
ITR-1, ITR-2 ,ITR-3, ITR-4, ITR-4S,
If income exceeding 5 Lakh
2
All persons (except where return is filed on ITR-7)
ITR-1, ITR-2 ,ITR-3, ITR-4, ITR-4S,
if deduction under section 90, 90A,91 claimed in return.
3
resident and has

(i) assets (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India; or

(ii) signing authority in any account located outside India
4
Firm
ITR-5
A firm  which is not covered under audit u/s 44AB .If it is covered under 44AB then digital signature is mandatory
5
All persons
As applicable
assessee is required to furnish Electronically a report of audit specified under sub-clause (iv), (v), (vi) or (via) of clause (23C) of section 10, section 10A,Section 10AA clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, section 44AB,Section 44DA,Section 50B, section 80-IA, section 80-IB, section 80-IC, section 80-ID, section 80JJAA, section 80LA, section 92E, section 115JB or section 115VW or to give a notice under clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 11 of the Act
Compulsory e filing of Income Tax return with digital signature Ay 14-15
1
Individual /HUF
ITR-4
if provisions of section 44AB are applicable
2
Firm
ITR-5
if provisions of section 44AB are applicable
3
Company
ITR-6
in all cases
4
Political Party
ITR-7
In all cases

Click below to continue.

Jaipur Court - C W 3508 of 2014 - listed on 25.8.2014.‏


PENDING
Date of query : 26/7/2014Time : 12:00:49 AM
CW'3508' of 2014 - R6604/2014
Petitioner :ALL INDIA RETIRED INSURANCE ORS
Respondent:L I C OF INIDA
Petitioner Advocate:SANJAY GANGWAR
Respondent Advocate:ARUN SHARMA
Class Code : 0521Registered on : 27/3/2014
Bench : SBStage : FOR ADMISSION- NOTICE SERVED
DATE GIVEN BY: PESHI CLERK DATE
Date of Listing : 25/8/2014
Listed in court No. 5 on 21/07/2014
Department Details

Friday, July 25, 2014

(r.k. viswanathan)

T SAMPATH IYENGAR

BWSSB pension upgradation implementation of court order‏


Further to my yesterday's note on the above subject,I have information that on a contempt petition by the BWSSB pensioners Association, the Govt. of Karnataka and the Board were more gracious than the Govt.of India and LIC ,by agreeing to pay 50% of the arrears by 31-03-2013 and the balance of 50% by end of September 2013. 

The relevant court order is attached

Please click below to read the order.

Attention: Readers

Of late we have been receiving messages like the above from persons in our contact list. Mails appear to be phishing messages or any other category it may belong to.  It is likely persons in our contact list may also receive such messages.  Readers are advised not to open such links.  We do not make any correspondence of this nature. -Editor.

Section 87A of Income Tax Act, 1961

Dear friends,


There is no change in rebate of Income Tax up to Rs 2000/-available under 87A of Chapter VIII of Income Tax Act,1961 for resident individuals where the total taxable income is up to Rs 500000 in the current Budget 2014.

"Rebate under Chapter VIII
Rebate for resident individuals in lower income bracket

Finance Act 2013 had introduced a new provision to provide rebate of INR 2,000 or actual tax payable whichever is less for resident individuals with total income up to INR 500,000. This provision is still applicable. - See more at: http://www.simpletaxindia.net/2014/07/direct-tax-changes-in-budget-2014.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SimpletaxIndia+%28SIMPLE+TAX+INDIA%29#sthash.1cYA25eO.dpuf
As per new section 87A,


“An assessee, being an individual resident in India, whose total income does not exceed five hundred thousand rupees, shall be entitled to a deduction, from the amount of income-tax (as computed before allowing the deductions under this Chapter) on his total income with which he is chargeable for any assessment year, of an amount equal to hundred per cent of such income-tax or an amount of two thousand rupees, whichever is less.”

(RK SAHNI)

Click below to read
Section 87A: Income Tax Rebate Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ’s)

Karnataka High Court case on BWSSB pensioners‏

Referring to the post by Mr T Sampath Iyengar, I reproduce a news item from Deccan Herald dt 16/4/2014 :
"Formulate medical aid plan for pensioners, HC tells BWSSB
Subhash Chandra N S, Bangalore, April 16, 2014, DHNS:

In what could be termed a ray of hope for Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) pensioners, the High Court of Karnataka has asked the board to reconsider its decision on paying medical benefits to its former employees.

Hearing a petition by BWSSB Pensioners’ Association (BPA), Justice A N Venugopala Gowda suggested that the board may formulate a contributory scheme and make available medical aid to the pensioners. 

“The board, keeping in view the financial implications, may formulate a contributory scheme and make available medical aid to the extent finances permit, in as much as members of the petitioner are getting pension and can become members of a contributory scheme making contribution and the board, if necessary, may obtain a health policy from an insurance company and extend the same to pensioners,” the court observed in its order dated April 2, 2014.

The BPA had moved the High Court after they were left out of the pay scale revision for 1990, 1994, 1998, 2003 and 2008 by BWSSB stating that there will be no revision for those who retired before 1990. 

Justice Jaganathan, who heard the matter, directed to give them the revised pension and consider extension of medical benefits to the pensioners and their spouse.The order was upheld by a bench headed by the then Chief Justice Vikramajit Sen on January 31, 2012, which dismissed an appeal by the BWSSB. 

When there was no response by the board to the order, a contempt petition was filed by the petitioners. However, during the hearing before Justice Shylendrakumar, the board agreed to pay the revised pension, but stated that it cannot consider the directions on extension of medical facilities. 

It submitted that no public sector has so far provided medical facilities to pensioners.A fresh petition was filed by the petitioners seeking extension of medical benefits. 

Revised benefits

During the hearing, counsel for petitioners Lakshmy Iyengar submitted that in the earlier petition before the Court, the Court had directed to give the revised pensionary benefits and consider medical benefits for the petitioners and their spouses. 

“It was not an option to consider or reject the medical benefit, but was an option on how much of benefit, each pensioner is entitled for,” she said.

Allowing the petition, Justice Venugopala Gowda observed, “Relevant portion of the order of the learned single judge, which has been extracted above, clearly goes to show that this court left the matter to be decided by the board as it deems fit. When a court directs an authority to consider, it requires the authority to apply its mind to the facts and circumstances of the case and then take a decision thereon in accordance with law.”

Since the board has not considered the claim of petitioners for extension of medical aid on par with in-service personnel, at least prospectively, by keeping in view the observation made in the order, it said: “Writ petitions are allowed in part and first respondent- board is directed to reconsider the claim of petitioners by keeping in view the observations made in the order within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order becomes available.”

It is significant to note that the BWSSB agreed to pay the revised pension. But the judgment is on the same footing as the three judgments in LIC Pensioners' favour, the only difference being that LIC has not come forward so far with its willingness to revise pensions.

So the three petitioners before the Supreme Court have to consider whether this judgment can be made use of in their pleadings before the SC.

With greetings,
C H Mahadevan