As it is well known that the income tax department has allowed Aadhaar card holders to use the biometric id number in lieu of the Permanent Account Number (PAN). But as per new provision of Income Tax, fine of Rs. 10,000 may be levied in case of wrong Aadhar Number. As per the latest amendments in the Finance Bill 2019, not only allowed people to use Aadhaar in lieu of PAN but also introduced a penalty for giving a false Aadhaar number. However, the new penalty rules are applicable only in cases where you are using Aadhaar in lieu of PAN and where quoting PAN is mandatory according to the income tax department rules. It is well known that although Aadhaar is issued by the Unique Identity Authority of India, yet the fine is not imposed by UIDAI but by the income tax department. Under Section 272B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the department can impose a penalty in case of default in complying with provisions relating to PAN, i.e., failure to obtain, quote, or authenticate PAN.
The
Chairman, CBDT and Members would hold a Video Conference with Chief
Commissioners and Directors General of Income Tax on 04.04.2014 at 11.00 AM on
the following issues:
1. Cadre
Re-structuring and Allocation of Post –
Further Roadmap &
2. Interim
Action Plan for the 1st Quarter of Financial Year 2014-15.
The other news is from the ITEF. The ITEF from its blog provided the following information
" “As per the decision taken by the
Secretariat, and upon rejection of our claim by the Government, we have filed
two Applications in the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal,
New Delhi on the following issues.
Fixation of pay of ITI / AO / PS who were
promoted between 1.1.2006 and 30.8.2008 in terms of provisions of Rule 7 of CCS
(Revised Pay) Rules 2008 taking the minimum pay on pay band as Rs 13860 (with
reference to Rs 7450) and no Rs 12090 (with reference to 6500).
For fixing the pay of promotes at the
prescribed entry pay of a direct recruit to the same post as given in Section 2
of the First Schedule of the CCS (RP) Rules 2008.
In the first case, as sought by us, the
Tribunal has also granted interim stay of the recovery of the alleged
"excess payment"
Comments
Post a Comment