Let me see how good you are at cracking codes. What can you make out of the number 1431101382? ... I am sure, even if Robert Langdon, along with Madame Sophie Neveu's help, tries his hands on this number, he won't be able to crack it and will not be able to uncover the significance of this number. The reason why I think so is that the number holds a very abstract meaning which only a few enlightened fellows like me can dare to explain( no pun intended). Well folks, this number is nothing but the Income Tax Return (ITR) number which I got from our IT department. Just like a sage, who endures penance to attain nirvana, I along with many others, went through a constitutionalized penance. The penance which I am talking about has nothing to do with the filling and filing of the return, but it is regarding the only question which I had and still have in my mind. The question is: Why am I filing for return of income?
The possible answer to the above question could be many. Probably (a) the ITR form was difficult to comprehend or (b) I was very busy with my office work( which many of friends and colleagues would reject straight away) or may be (c) I owe a huge sum to the government and I do not want to pay that. But folks, the answer is none of the foregoing and let me strike out the above mentioned options one by one. First, the ITR form is really a "Saral" form and filling it is a no brainer when you have your Form-16 in front of you. Moreover, if you have your signature in digitalised version then you don't have to even move your arse, the whole process can be completed via e-filing within an hour( time taken depends on his/her proficiency). Second, I am quite free from work, nowadays, that I can even file returns for others, provided I get reasonable incentives. And to strike out the third option, all I can say is that the balance amount to be refunded or paid was nothing but zero. So, why did i had that question? Well folks the reason for that is nothing but the reason which I gave to strike out the third option. Why to file for return of income even when you have "0" as the balance amount, which means there is nothing to be settled between an individual and government.
Well I know, it is very important to file returns, as ones credit worthiness is updated accordingly. Every time one applies for a loan or credit card from any financial institution, ones credit worthiness is validated before the grant. So, if you wish to get any credit from any bank, make sure that all your returns are duly paid otherwise you will be left wondering why the bank rejected your request. Most of us would be aware of the fact that IT department of our country has made much progress and many of their tasks are handled not on files and registers but on computers. Why shouldn't that be? India being the largest IT exporter is expected to have a robust, smart and reliable system which ought to handle thousands of operations and requests daily. Moreover, it is quite evident from the website of IT department of India, http://incometaxindia.gov.in/, that they do promote the idea of prefixing all the transactions with a small and smart "e". You have options like e-pay taxes, e-file returns et al. which makes me feel happy and proud about. But these feelings gets overshadowed when one is asked to file for returns for zero balance, because this raises a question on the smartness of the system. The only question which, I have noticed, regularly pops up is "Do I have to file returns even when there is no refund due to me?" but rarely did I find somebody asking "Why, why do I have to go through this when there is no refund due to me?". I found something pertinent to my question in the ITD website, which was articulated like this:
Amounts paid as advance tax and withheld in the form of TDS or collected in the form of TCS will take the character of your tax due only on completion of self-assessment of your income. This self-assessment is intimated to the department by way of filing of return. Only then does the government acquire rights over the prepaid taxes as its own revenue. Filing of return is critical for this process and, hence, has been made mandatory. Failure will attract levy of penalty.
This sounds a logical explanation but on second thought one doesn't finds this too convincing. Why isn't the system smart enough to exempt individuals or institutions, who have already paid their taxes to the government, from filing of return. Apparently not. There are millions of salaried individuals, who get their salary after getting the tax deducted at source(TDS). And a major chunk of this class will not have any other source of income. So why not exempt them from filing return of income? Why can't the systems database identify them and grant a green flag to them. This will not only save thousands of non-productive hours but will also make people like me happy, by circumventing the process. By non-productive hours I mean to say the time which one spends in filing the return and the time which IT department needs to validate the provided redundant data. If one doesn't puts any claim over ones TDS amount then government should be taking over that amount by default. If you, the reader, are aware of any possible benefit of filing return of income for no dues do let me know, I would be thankful to you. If not, then let us suggest the move, to abolish zero return filing, to Dr. Manmohan Singh [:D]. This guy's government needs some serious dosage of popularity and I really wish him all the best for coming elections.
P.S: Those who have not filed their return of income, for no dues, please note that you can do so before March 31st 2009. So chill. However, if you owe money then I would say Chilly, be ready to cough out Rs 5000 as penalty and an additional interest of 1% per month.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Thursday, July 3, 2008
I Attest the following
This is the age of the WEB 2.0. Any youth who doesn't have an account in Facebook, Orkut or its ilk is considered un-savvy as per current social trends. I myself have an account on Orkut and Facebook, but at the same time I avoid invitations coming from many other social networking sites (the most irritating one is the one which reads "XYZ tagged you", what's that, am not cattle). Orkut is the one with which I am most comfortable, because of many reasons, and use it quite frequently. For many of the Orkutter, one of the prestigious things is to have numerous testimonials a.k.a testi's under one's belt. But one thing which I believe that most of the Orkutters, and even common folks, are unaware is the word Testimonial's etymology. The word Testimonial, and others like Testament, Attest and Testify, is derived from the word "testis", a part of male anatomy. Offended? Disgusted? or Appalled? If any of the foregoing, you may cease to read further.
Well, I found it interesting when I learned about this factual trivia from the book "Facts and Trivia" by Sir Isaac Asimov, 6 years back during my college days. Also, my current google-research provides me with some more trivia. Here's one of them, it is stated that under ancient Roman laws, no man can be considered as evidence or witness unless one verifies one's virility, and hence testify in legal matters, and while testifying one has to hold one's "virility"; that reminds me of my school days when we used to swear to prove our point, maa kasam this or maa kasama that. And interestingly, the word “detest” means to dislike intensely, and implicitly, to hate to the bottom of one's ... you know that, right? This shows, how male chauvinistic society it was, legally you couldn't have testified if you were to belong to the fairer sex, which meant women hardly had any legal rights. But now, the world is changing, for the good. One doesn't need that male anatomy to be a witness, neither one has to show one's virility to attest, just a rubber stamp is sufficient. Having said that, whenever, in Orkut, I see a testimonial from a female to her male friend; or when any of my friends asks me write a testi for him/her, my mind just smirks sheepishly. Probably, the smirk is due to some weird imagination. Imagine, had the present been something like the ancient Roman Era, our female friends would have been deprived of the privilege and also for every testimonial from one to ones friend, one might find oneself in a very compromising situation. Too much imagination! OK let's stop it here only.
That's all what I wanted to blog and pass on the trivial fact; I hope you find it informative, but not offensive. I would like to close this blog with a quote from a letter published in the feminist Ms. magazine:
“I protest the use of the word ‘testimony’ when referring to a woman’s statements, because its root is ‘testes’which has nothing to do with being a female. Why not use ‘ovarimony’?”
Well, I found it interesting when I learned about this factual trivia from the book "Facts and Trivia" by Sir Isaac Asimov, 6 years back during my college days. Also, my current google-research provides me with some more trivia. Here's one of them, it is stated that under ancient Roman laws, no man can be considered as evidence or witness unless one verifies one's virility, and hence testify in legal matters, and while testifying one has to hold one's "virility"; that reminds me of my school days when we used to swear to prove our point, maa kasam this or maa kasama that. And interestingly, the word “detest” means to dislike intensely, and implicitly, to hate to the bottom of one's ... you know that, right? This shows, how male chauvinistic society it was, legally you couldn't have testified if you were to belong to the fairer sex, which meant women hardly had any legal rights. But now, the world is changing, for the good. One doesn't need that male anatomy to be a witness, neither one has to show one's virility to attest, just a rubber stamp is sufficient. Having said that, whenever, in Orkut, I see a testimonial from a female to her male friend; or when any of my friends asks me write a testi for him/her, my mind just smirks sheepishly. Probably, the smirk is due to some weird imagination. Imagine, had the present been something like the ancient Roman Era, our female friends would have been deprived of the privilege and also for every testimonial from one to ones friend, one might find oneself in a very compromising situation. Too much imagination! OK let's stop it here only.
That's all what I wanted to blog and pass on the trivial fact; I hope you find it informative, but not offensive. I would like to close this blog with a quote from a letter published in the feminist Ms. magazine:
“I protest the use of the word ‘testimony’ when referring to a woman’s statements, because its root is ‘testes’which has nothing to do with being a female. Why not use ‘ovarimony’?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
