MSP CASE STATUS IN ORISSA HIGH COURT

W.P.(C) No. 13130 of 2017
21.07.2017
        Mr. S.S. Das, learned Sr. Counsel along with Ms. S. Das files memo of appearance of behalf of the petitioners in Court today, which is taken on record.
        Mr. A. Mohanty, learned Central Govt. Counsel also file memo of appearance on behalf of the opposite parties, which is taken on record.
        The name of Mr. A. Mohanty, learned Central Govt. Counsel be indicated in the cause list.
        The petitioners, who were working under the Army, Navy and Air Force, have filed this application for pay parity as per Military Service Pay (MSP) paid to the Commissioned Officers and Personnel belonging to Military Nursing Service and further seek for a direction to the opposite parties to grant the consequential benefits as due and admissible in accordance with law.
        Preliminary objection was raised with regard to maintainability of the writ petition. Mr. A. Mohanty, learned Central Govt. Counsel raises objection and states that on constitution of Army Tribunal, this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this application.
        Mr. S.S. Das, learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioners referring to Section 14 of the Armed Force Tribunal Act, 2007 states that the jurisdiction of this Court has not excluded, rather it is inclusive under the said provision, wherein under Sub-clause-1, it has been clearly indicated that save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the Tribunal shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, all the jurisdiction, powers and authority, exercisable immediately before that day by all courts (except the Supreme Court or a High Court exercising jurisdiction under article 226 and 227 of the Constitution) in relation to all service matters. It is contended that exercising the power under article 226 and 227 of the Constitution has not been excluded in view of the provisions contained under Section 14 of the Armed Force Tribunal Act. To substantiate his contention, he has relied upon the judgments of the apex Court in Executive Engineer, Southern Electricity Supply Company of Orissa Limited (SOUTHCO) and another v. Sri Seetaram Rice Mill, (2012) 2 SCC 108 and Union of India and others v. Major General Shri Kant Sharma  and another, (2015) 6 SCC 773.
        In view of such position, keeping the question of maintainability open for consideration, issue notice to the opposite parties.
        Three extra copies of the writ petition along with annexures be served on Mr. A. Mohanty, learned Central Govt. Counsel within three days, who shall take instruction in the matter or file counter affidavit.
List it after four weeks.
                                                            .      JUDGE
                                                    (DR. B.R. SARANGI)
                                          

Rs 1 lakh SC fine for plea on settled soldier disability case

Expressing displeasure over the Ministry of Defence (MoD) getting into unnecessary litigation, the Supreme Court has imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on the government for filing an appeal in the case of a disabled soldier when similar appeals had already been dismissed earlier.

A former soldier, Naik Balbir Singh, who hails from Hoshiarpur district, had been granted relief by the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal in 2016. The MoD, however, challenged the order.

“This is unnecessarily adding to the burden of the justice delivery systems for which the Union of India must take full responsibility,” a Division Bench comprising Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta held recently.

It also asked the government to deposit the costs with the SC Legal Services Committee within four weeks for utilisation in juvenile justice issues. 

The case is expected to come up for hearing on April 23 for the government to file its compliance report.

A committee of experts on reduction of litigation had come down heavily upon the MoD and the services headquarters for generating unnecessary “ego-fuelled litigation” by perceiving litigants as persons “acting against the state”. 

The panel had noted that even SC decisions, sentiments expressed by the PM and Defence Minister and letters by A-G for reducing litigation had not had any effect.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT ORDER
Courtesy:EX-Servicemen Welfare

PETITION TO PRIMEMINISTER,FINANCE MINISTER & DEFENCE MINISTER

MBC MENON started this petition to Finance Minister and 2 others

Dear Fellow countrymen,
You may be aware that our Members of Parliament are entitled for a good amount as remuneration and the entire amount is Exempted from INCOME TAX. We are Happy to note that this Privilege given to our Peoples Representatives but regret to note that this privilege is denied to Soldiers who safe guard our Borders to enable the entire countrymen  sleep peacefully at the cost of their precious life.
Hence The VOICE OF PENSIONERS, an E-Journal Working for the Welfare   Soldiers & Ex-servicemen Start This Petition and request the GOI to grand INCOME TAX EXEMPTION FOR SOLDIERS &  EX- SOLDIERS.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN PETITION

Brief of the meetings held between the Staff Side(JCM) and Official Side

No.NC/JCM/2018 Dated: April 10, 2018 The General Secretaries,
All Constituents Organizations of the JCM(Staff Side)
Dear Comrades,
Sub: Brief of the meetings held between the Staff Side(JCM) and Official Side
Met yesterday, i.e. on 9th April, 2018, with the Secretary(DoP&T), Government of India, Dr. C. Chandramauli, who joined recently, and requested him for holding meetings of the Standing Committee of the NC/JCM and National Anomalies Committee at an earliest. He has promised for the same.
Today, i.e. on 10th April, 2018, met the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India, and handed him over a copy of the enclosed letter.
He said that, the issue of the NPS is under finalization and Secretary(Pension), Government of India, had very recently given presentation. He further said that, there would be some visible changes in the NPS.
On the issue of Minimum Wage and Fitment Formula he once again mentioned that it depends totally on the political call.
So far the issue of non-holding of meetings of the National Council(JCM) is concerned, he said that he would try to hold this meeting very shortly.
This is for your information.

RESERVATION FOR RE-EMPLOYMENT FOR EX-SERVICEMEN BY STATES

CHANGES IN INCOME TAX FORMS AY 2018-19 FY 2017-18

Income Tax department has notified the New ITR form for Ay 2018-19 Fy 2017-18.In new forms 25 specific changes has been made to enable Income tax department to get more information from Taxpayers. 

There is no change in the manner of filing of ITR Forms as compared to last year. All these ITR Forms are to be filed electronically. However, where return is furnished in ITR Form-1 (Sahaj) or ITR-4 (Sugam), the following persons have an option to file return in paper form:-

• (i) an Individual of the age of 80 years or more at any time during the previous year; or 
• (ii) an Individual or HUF whose income does not exceed five lakh rupees and who has not claimed any refund in the Return of Income.

E-filing of Income tax return has not been started yet for assessment year 2018-19 and expected to be started from 15th May,2018

Main changes has been covered as under.

1. Changes in Salary details in ITR-1.

Earlier only taxable salary is required to be filed under the head of salary income in Income Tax return .But now more details has been asked to be filed under salary Income. in our view this step has been taken keeping in view of fraudulent refund claimed by the salaried person in Mumbai and Bangaluru .

New columns in salary head in ITR has been added as under

• i Salary (excluding all allowances, perquisites and profit in lieu of salary)  
• ii Allowances not exempt 
• iii Value of perquisites 
• iv Profit in lieu of salary 
• v Deductions u/s 16 

Filling of above details are not very difficult for salaried persons but it will be confusing for few as many salaried person are not aware of what is to be included under Profit in lieu of salary or Value of perquisites and deduction u/s 16.

In our view all such information is provided in Form 16 itself except allowance not exempt.So my suggestion to govt is that govt should also amend form 16 so that it also shows the value of allowances not exempt.

2. Changes in Income under the head House property.

More details are required to be filled under this head in Income tax return form ITR-2 also. Now following  information is required to filled for income from house property

• i Gross rent received/ receivable/ letable value 
• ii Tax paid to local authorities 
• iii Annual Value (i – ii) 
• iv 30% of Annual Value 
• v Interest payable on borrowed capital 
• vi Income chargeable under the head ‘House Property’ (iii – iv – v)

All the columns explained in above in 1 and 2 was required to be filed in ITR-2 but now it has been insterted in ITR-1 also. So ITR-1(sahaj) is no more "Sahaj"(easy) Now.

3. The columns explained at Sr no 1 and 2 has also been inserted in ITR-4 return for presumptive income scheme also called as Sugam.

4.Non resident is required to file ITR-2 in case of  no income from business and profession and can not file return on ITR-1 .Further he has to provide details of bank account to get refund from income tax department.

5. New Column of Fees under section 234F  has been inserted in all relevant ITR. In ITR -1 it is given at D10 Fee u/s 234F

The Finance Act, 2017 vide section 234F levied fees of Rs.5,000 in case where return is furnished after the due date but on or before 31st December of the relevant assessment year and Rs.10,000, in other cases. However, it is also provided to restrict the fees to Rs.1,000, where the total income does not exceed five lakh rupees.

APPLICABILITY OF STANDARD DEDUCTION TO PENSIONERS