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 Supreme Court has held that retirement age and
pay scale fixed by University Grants Commission(UGC) for professors are not
binding for universities run by the states.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir(since retired)
held that there would be no automatic application of UGC recommendations for
state universities and it is for a state government to take a decision.
"There is no ambiguity that the final
decision to enhance the age of superannuation of teachers within a particular
state would be that of the state itself. The right of the Commission to
frame regulations having the force of law is admitted. However, the state governments are also entitled to legislate with matters relating to education," it said.
frame regulations having the force of law is admitted. However, the state governments are also entitled to legislate with matters relating to education," it said.
The court passed the judgement on a bunch of petitions filed
by different states and teachers from different universities on the issue of
implementation of UGC guidelines and whether certain regulations framed by it
had a binding effect on educational institutions being run by different states
and even under state enactments.
"In our view, there can be no automatic
application of the recommendations made by the Commission, without any
conscious decision being taken by the state in this regard, on account of the
financial implications and other consequences attached to such a
decision," the apex court said.
It, however, dismissed the state governments' plea that the
UGC has no authority to impose any conditions with regard to its educational
institutions.
Comments
Post a Comment