Dear Mr USM Bish,
It is not the incometax which is being demanded but the cost of Two years Study Leave since as he did not complete 3 years physical service after study leave as required vide the Bond filled by him before going on study leave. If in between he went on unpaid leave that cant be counted towards the physical service of 3 years after the study leave. Income Tax was the department where he was working and so it is not income tax due as understood by you.
Every body can make a mistake. It Anna Team will be right in all cases and others will be wrong always.
Col Ashok Bhanot
It is not the incometax which is being demanded but the cost of Two years Study Leave since as he did not complete 3 years physical service after study leave as required vide the Bond filled by him before going on study leave. If in between he went on unpaid leave that cant be counted towards the physical service of 3 years after the study leave. Income Tax was the department where he was working and so it is not income tax due as understood by you.
Every body can make a mistake. It Anna Team will be right in all cases and others will be wrong always.
Col Ashok Bhanot
> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 22:40:05 +0530
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Arvind Kejriwal - IT Notice
> From: usmbish@gmail.com
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 1) Arvind Kejrwal is still an IRS officer. The reasons why
> > his resignation has not been accepted is very well known.
> > Each and every year the govt (IT dept) updates the list of
> > their employees (as required under section 4 of RTI Act).
> > The URL is here and Arvind's name is on it
> > [www.irsofficersonline.gov.in/content/Alphabetical_Index.pdf]
> >
>
> There are two issues here:
>
> a) Administrative: If a resignation has been given, and it has
> not been accepted for whatever reasons, the issue needs to be
> dealt administratively, depending upon prevailing policies of
> the Department. What has the IT Deptt doing for the last 5
> years ? Why are they raking up this issue now ? And why are
> departmental issues being placed as headlines ? Surely there
> are some other ulterior motives ...
>
> b) Financial: Tax is applicable if payment has been made. Has
> the Govt been paying him regularly for all these years? If
> yes, the IT claim is very much in order. But if not, no IT
> accrues. There can be no taxes under situations where there is
> no income.
>
> Why mix the two things ?
>
> >
> > 2) My question is what steps has Arvind taken to get his
> > name deleted from this list ? Let him place these facts into
> > the public domain.
> >
>
> This is departmental administrative issue. Why should the aam-
> janta be concerned, beyond what he has already put up in all
> major newspapers and his TV interview ?
>
> >
> > 3) About his being a foreign financed inteligence agent,
> > there have been many posts on this in the archives of this
> > group and RTI_India where specifics have been given.. The
> > Magsaysay awards are well known to be CIA sponsorship. The
> > Ashoka awards are from MI6.
> >
>
> I would not make much credence on posts on general public
> mailing lists. Magasaysay awards are from Phillipines. All
> personal assets of President Ramon Magsaysay are with the
> Rockfeller Foundation. The prize was established in April 1957
> by the trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation Fund based
> in New York City with the concurrence of the Philippine
> government. This is official. I do not know any CIA
> connections here. The citation I put reference to is from the
> wikipedia.
>
> >
> > 4) Aruna Roy, Arvindf Kejriwal, Anna Hazare etc had hardly
> > anything to do with RTI Act This is all their self generated
> > media publicity which ill informed idiots like you keep
> > repeating / circulating as the truth. The fact is that the
> > RTI Act 2005 was drafted by Mr A.N. Tiwari and his team at
> > DoPT with quite a bit of input from me and my co-mods like
> > Mr Ashish Kumar - and was also based on the shortcomings of
> > the HD Shourie draft and the FOI Act.
> >
>
> Please distinguish two things:
>
> a) Public Action : Bringing public awareness/ and building
> public pressures on the Govt to act.
>
> b) Paper work : Drafting of the Act.
>
> The contributions of those stated by me are for the former
> action only. I can personally confirm the agitations taken by
> Anna Hazare at Pune and Mumbai for the Maharashtra RTI Act,
> last decade, having physically seen them. This public action
> forced the Maharashtra Govt to Act. I would believe, this
> action would be more difficult, and more important than
> drafting the Act itself. In this regards their contributions
> are minimal, restricted to a "wish-list" in layman's terms. I
> would place less credits there. To the best of my knowledge,
> the RTI Act 2005 is based on the preceding Maharashtra RTI
> Act.
>
> On a serious note: Requested, I may please be unsubscribed
> from the "HumJanenge" mailing list. The kind of exchanges, and
> language contained by some of the participants, (virtually
> going onto personal vilification) does not gel with educated
> gentry anywhere. I would like to leave.
>
> Dr USM Bish
> Bangalore
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Arvind Kejriwal - IT Notice
> From: usmbish@gmail.com
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 1) Arvind Kejrwal is still an IRS officer. The reasons why
> > his resignation has not been accepted is very well known.
> > Each and every year the govt (IT dept) updates the list of
> > their employees (as required under section 4 of RTI Act).
> > The URL is here and Arvind's name is on it
> > [www.irsofficersonline.gov.in/content/Alphabetical_Index.pdf]
> >
>
> There are two issues here:
>
> a) Administrative: If a resignation has been given, and it has
> not been accepted for whatever reasons, the issue needs to be
> dealt administratively, depending upon prevailing policies of
> the Department. What has the IT Deptt doing for the last 5
> years ? Why are they raking up this issue now ? And why are
> departmental issues being placed as headlines ? Surely there
> are some other ulterior motives ...
>
> b) Financial: Tax is applicable if payment has been made. Has
> the Govt been paying him regularly for all these years? If
> yes, the IT claim is very much in order. But if not, no IT
> accrues. There can be no taxes under situations where there is
> no income.
>
> Why mix the two things ?
>
> >
> > 2) My question is what steps has Arvind taken to get his
> > name deleted from this list ? Let him place these facts into
> > the public domain.
> >
>
> This is departmental administrative issue. Why should the aam-
> janta be concerned, beyond what he has already put up in all
> major newspapers and his TV interview ?
>
> >
> > 3) About his being a foreign financed inteligence agent,
> > there have been many posts on this in the archives of this
> > group and RTI_India where specifics have been given.. The
> > Magsaysay awards are well known to be CIA sponsorship. The
> > Ashoka awards are from MI6.
> >
>
> I would not make much credence on posts on general public
> mailing lists. Magasaysay awards are from Phillipines. All
> personal assets of President Ramon Magsaysay are with the
> Rockfeller Foundation. The prize was established in April 1957
> by the trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation Fund based
> in New York City with the concurrence of the Philippine
> government. This is official. I do not know any CIA
> connections here. The citation I put reference to is from the
> wikipedia.
>
> >
> > 4) Aruna Roy, Arvindf Kejriwal, Anna Hazare etc had hardly
> > anything to do with RTI Act This is all their self generated
> > media publicity which ill informed idiots like you keep
> > repeating / circulating as the truth. The fact is that the
> > RTI Act 2005 was drafted by Mr A.N. Tiwari and his team at
> > DoPT with quite a bit of input from me and my co-mods like
> > Mr Ashish Kumar - and was also based on the shortcomings of
> > the HD Shourie draft and the FOI Act.
> >
>
> Please distinguish two things:
>
> a) Public Action : Bringing public awareness/ and building
> public pressures on the Govt to act.
>
> b) Paper work : Drafting of the Act.
>
> The contributions of those stated by me are for the former
> action only. I can personally confirm the agitations taken by
> Anna Hazare at Pune and Mumbai for the Maharashtra RTI Act,
> last decade, having physically seen them. This public action
> forced the Maharashtra Govt to Act. I would believe, this
> action would be more difficult, and more important than
> drafting the Act itself. In this regards their contributions
> are minimal, restricted to a "wish-list" in layman's terms. I
> would place less credits there. To the best of my knowledge,
> the RTI Act 2005 is based on the preceding Maharashtra RTI
> Act.
>
> On a serious note: Requested, I may please be unsubscribed
> from the "HumJanenge" mailing list. The kind of exchanges, and
> language contained by some of the participants, (virtually
> going onto personal vilification) does not gel with educated
> gentry anywhere. I would like to leave.
>
> Dr USM Bish
> Bangalore
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.