Wrong info on income could land politicians in jail
Mahalingam Ponnusamy TNN, 23 nov 2011, chennai edition,page no.8
Chennai: More than 50 MLAs of the previous assembly who contested in the 2011 assembly elections have not given their total income in the affidavit filed before the election commission. And legal experts say that they can be prosecuted for giving a false statement in a sworn affidavit.
Chief electoral officer Praveen Kumar insists that the total gross income should be declared in the affidavit, whereas many candidates have chosen to declare only their taxable income. Some have not declared their agricultural income, which is non-taxable.
“Anyone can file a criminal case under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, against those who produce wrong information in their affidavit and if found guilty they can be put behind bars for a year,” said chief electoral officer Praveen Kumar.
But he added that the election commission does not have any role in checking the veracity of the information filed in the affidavits.
He said that a recent Supreme Court order allows the returning officer to accept the wealth details of the candidates without verification but other grounds like age and community must be verified.
Representation of the People Act, Chapter III (electoral offences), Section 125A speaks about the penalty for filing false affidavits. The section explains that a person who “…fails to furnish information relating to subsection (1) of section 33 A (asserts) or gives false information which he knows or has reason to believe to be false, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both,”
These offences are also punishable with a fine under Section 171 (G) of the Indian Penal Code that deals with elections.
D Nagasaila, an advocate with the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, said there is no mechanism to check and ensure that the data furnished by the candidates are genuine.
“Candidates feel encouraged to give wrong information since there is no follow up action on the affidavits,” Nagasaila told Times Of India.
LAWFUL ACTION
• Under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, anyone can file a criminal case against those who give wrong information in their sworn affidavit
• Section 125A of the act says if found guilty, defaulters can be put behind bars
• These offences are also punishable with a fine under Section 171 (G) of the Indian Penal Code that deals with elections
• However, the election commission does not have any role in checking the veracity of the information filed in the affidavits
• A recent SC order allows the returning officer to accept wealth details of candidates without verification but other grounds like age and community must be verified
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
tn, MLA income
TDS|Tax|Tamil Nadu assembly|tamil nadu|salary|RTI|MLA
In TN, MLAs’ incomes go under-reported
Mahalingam Ponnusamy, TNN |chennai edition,pageno.1 Nov 23, 2011, 01.52AM IST
CHENNAI: Income tax sleuths are known to keep a hawk eye on collecting taxes especially from businessmen and the middle class. But there is no mechanism in place to ensure that the people's representatives pay taxes on the salary they get from the government.
With tax not being deducted at source, more than half the MLAs in the last assembly who contested again this year have underreported their Rs 6 lakh-ayear salaries in the affidavits filed with the election commission. Some, however, reported receiving much more than their income from the government. Ask income tax officers about the oversight and they put the onus on the legislative assembly secretary.
In a response to an RTI query, tax officials said: "No TDS returns have been filed by the Tamil Nadu State Legislative Assembly after deduction of tax from their salary."
An MLA in the Tamil Nadu assembly typically received a gross monthly salary of nearly Rs 50,000 in 2009-2010. Some 100 MLAs contested again in the 2011 assembly elections and filed affidavits with the election commission. Of these, 53 did not mention the annual income received from the government in their affidavits and eight said they did not have a PAN (permanent account number).
Chief electoral officer Praveen Kumar told TOI that candidates should have declared their gross income in the space provided in the affidavit. Those without a PAN include transport minister V Senthil Balaji, T Velmurugan, an ex-MLA who was expelled from the PMK, and R Chinnaswamy, elected from Singanallur constituency.
Six MLAs, including PMK state president G K Mani, who had a PAN, have reported that they did not have any taxable income. But, according to the RTI response from tax officials, only around Rs 5,000 of the MLAs' income was non-taxable. When TOI contacted some of the MLAs, they said they were unaware of the tax limit and procedures.
"The government is paying salary only after deducting tax amount. There is no need to file taxes personally and I don't have any assets in my name," said T Velmurugan, whose affidavit says he neither has a PAN and nor any income. There are defaulters in all the major parties.
Fifteen DMK MLAs out of the 30 who contested in 2011, 19 from AIADMK and 13 from Congress showed their income to be less than Rs 6 lakh. Striking a different note, H Vasanthakumar and Peter Alphonse of the Congress, S R Raja and P Moorthy of the DMK, and K A Sengottaiyan of the AIADMK declared incomes of over Rs 6 lakh. Sengottaiyan has declared his family income, too, in the affidavit.
In TN, MLAs’ incomes go under-reported
Mahalingam Ponnusamy, TNN |chennai edition,pageno.1 Nov 23, 2011, 01.52AM IST
CHENNAI: Income tax sleuths are known to keep a hawk eye on collecting taxes especially from businessmen and the middle class. But there is no mechanism in place to ensure that the people's representatives pay taxes on the salary they get from the government.
With tax not being deducted at source, more than half the MLAs in the last assembly who contested again this year have underreported their Rs 6 lakh-ayear salaries in the affidavits filed with the election commission. Some, however, reported receiving much more than their income from the government. Ask income tax officers about the oversight and they put the onus on the legislative assembly secretary.
In a response to an RTI query, tax officials said: "No TDS returns have been filed by the Tamil Nadu State Legislative Assembly after deduction of tax from their salary."
An MLA in the Tamil Nadu assembly typically received a gross monthly salary of nearly Rs 50,000 in 2009-2010. Some 100 MLAs contested again in the 2011 assembly elections and filed affidavits with the election commission. Of these, 53 did not mention the annual income received from the government in their affidavits and eight said they did not have a PAN (permanent account number).
Chief electoral officer Praveen Kumar told TOI that candidates should have declared their gross income in the space provided in the affidavit. Those without a PAN include transport minister V Senthil Balaji, T Velmurugan, an ex-MLA who was expelled from the PMK, and R Chinnaswamy, elected from Singanallur constituency.
Six MLAs, including PMK state president G K Mani, who had a PAN, have reported that they did not have any taxable income. But, according to the RTI response from tax officials, only around Rs 5,000 of the MLAs' income was non-taxable. When TOI contacted some of the MLAs, they said they were unaware of the tax limit and procedures.
"The government is paying salary only after deducting tax amount. There is no need to file taxes personally and I don't have any assets in my name," said T Velmurugan, whose affidavit says he neither has a PAN and nor any income. There are defaulters in all the major parties.
Fifteen DMK MLAs out of the 30 who contested in 2011, 19 from AIADMK and 13 from Congress showed their income to be less than Rs 6 lakh. Striking a different note, H Vasanthakumar and Peter Alphonse of the Congress, S R Raja and P Moorthy of the DMK, and K A Sengottaiyan of the AIADMK declared incomes of over Rs 6 lakh. Sengottaiyan has declared his family income, too, in the affidavit.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
RTI rulings on I-T returns not uniform
RTI rulings on I-T returns not uniform
Test Of Public Interest Is Interpreted Differently By Income Tax Officials
10th nov 2011
Mahalingam Ponnusamy TNN
Chennai: Is it possible for a citizen to access details of income tax returns filed by individuals and organizations by invoking the Right To Information (RTI) Act
The answer is both yes and no.For,too much discretion vested with the income tax authorities as well as officials designated as public information officers (PIO) under the RTI Act has resulted in utter lack of uniformity on results.
For instance,information relating to a Chennai-based charitable trust Muthamizh Peravai was furnished to RTI activists,whereas the details of IT returns filed by another trust Manitha Neyam Charitable Trust were denied to activists.Incidentally,the first trust is run by former chief minister M Karunanidhis nephew P Amirtham,whereas the second trust belongs to AIADMK leader and the new mayor of Chennai Saidai Duraisamy.
Whenever applications are filed seeking details of I-T returns of individuals or organizations,officials turn to Section 8(j) of the RTI Act for guidance.The provision says the officer could part with the information if he is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information.It also adds that information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a state legislature,shall not be denied to any person.The assessee,whose I-T returns are sought by the applicant,too is given an opportunity to object or permit furnishing of such information.Of course,even in case of objection,the public information officer has the authority to overrule objections and disclose information.
The I-T Act accepts that the department is dutybound to supply information sought by legislature.Then,why do they hesitate to furnish the information to public, asked V Gopalakrishnan,an activist who filed an RTI application with the I-T department seeking copies of I-T returns.Recently,the department refused to furnish a copy of the I-T returns of Manitha Neayam Charitable Trust,founded and run by Chennai mayor Saidai Duraisamy and his family members.The Manitha Neayam IAS,IPS free coaching centre was established under this trust in December 2006.
In a stark contrast to this refusal,the same I-T department parted with information relating to another highprofile trust recently.Though Muthamizh Peravai at Mylapore is managed by the Kalaignar TV director and former CM Karunanidhis nephew Amirtham,activists were able to get information about its I-T returns.The annual tax returns of bigger political establishments such as the Indian National Congress (INC) too had been obtained under the RTI Act,say activists,lamenting the whimsical refusal of the I-T department to disclose information relating to Manitha Neyam Charitable Trust.
There are no clear and uniform decisions on such applications.Some public information officers at I-T department furnish the return details,but most others refuse to furnish the documents, Gopalakrishnan said.
Goplakrishnan sought the I-T returns and balance sheet submitted by the Manitha Neayam Charitable Trust from 2000 to 2011.In a reply dated October 21,the chief public information officer in I-T department said: The information sought for is filed before me in a fiduciary relationship and nothing in the (RTI) petition indicates the involvement of any larger public interest.As such,the information sough for cannot be furnished.
As per Section 138(b) of the I-T Act an income tax authority may furnish information relating to I-T returns if he is satisfied that it is in the public interest to do so.
Test Of Public Interest Is Interpreted Differently By Income Tax Officials
10th nov 2011
Mahalingam Ponnusamy TNN
Chennai: Is it possible for a citizen to access details of income tax returns filed by individuals and organizations by invoking the Right To Information (RTI) Act
The answer is both yes and no.For,too much discretion vested with the income tax authorities as well as officials designated as public information officers (PIO) under the RTI Act has resulted in utter lack of uniformity on results.
For instance,information relating to a Chennai-based charitable trust Muthamizh Peravai was furnished to RTI activists,whereas the details of IT returns filed by another trust Manitha Neyam Charitable Trust were denied to activists.Incidentally,the first trust is run by former chief minister M Karunanidhis nephew P Amirtham,whereas the second trust belongs to AIADMK leader and the new mayor of Chennai Saidai Duraisamy.
Whenever applications are filed seeking details of I-T returns of individuals or organizations,officials turn to Section 8(j) of the RTI Act for guidance.The provision says the officer could part with the information if he is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information.It also adds that information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a state legislature,shall not be denied to any person.The assessee,whose I-T returns are sought by the applicant,too is given an opportunity to object or permit furnishing of such information.Of course,even in case of objection,the public information officer has the authority to overrule objections and disclose information.
The I-T Act accepts that the department is dutybound to supply information sought by legislature.Then,why do they hesitate to furnish the information to public, asked V Gopalakrishnan,an activist who filed an RTI application with the I-T department seeking copies of I-T returns.Recently,the department refused to furnish a copy of the I-T returns of Manitha Neayam Charitable Trust,founded and run by Chennai mayor Saidai Duraisamy and his family members.The Manitha Neayam IAS,IPS free coaching centre was established under this trust in December 2006.
In a stark contrast to this refusal,the same I-T department parted with information relating to another highprofile trust recently.Though Muthamizh Peravai at Mylapore is managed by the Kalaignar TV director and former CM Karunanidhis nephew Amirtham,activists were able to get information about its I-T returns.The annual tax returns of bigger political establishments such as the Indian National Congress (INC) too had been obtained under the RTI Act,say activists,lamenting the whimsical refusal of the I-T department to disclose information relating to Manitha Neyam Charitable Trust.
There are no clear and uniform decisions on such applications.Some public information officers at I-T department furnish the return details,but most others refuse to furnish the documents, Gopalakrishnan said.
Goplakrishnan sought the I-T returns and balance sheet submitted by the Manitha Neayam Charitable Trust from 2000 to 2011.In a reply dated October 21,the chief public information officer in I-T department said: The information sought for is filed before me in a fiduciary relationship and nothing in the (RTI) petition indicates the involvement of any larger public interest.As such,the information sough for cannot be furnished.
As per Section 138(b) of the I-T Act an income tax authority may furnish information relating to I-T returns if he is satisfied that it is in the public interest to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)