CA Haresh Kataria
The Central Board of Direct Taxes vide notification No.2/2017 dated 6th January,2017 has once again amended Rule 114E (reporting in AIR ) casting reporting obligations on the banks and post offices for reporting of cash deposits in the bank accounts and post office accounts prior to the demontisation period.
Reporting of Cash Deposits in banks and post offices during the period 1st April 2016 to 8th November, 2016 and cash deposits during the period 9th November, 2016 and 30th December, 2016.
Section 285BA requires specified persons to furnish a Annual Information Report (AIR) or Statement of Financial Transactions (SFT) listed in Rule 114E. Originally 11 categories of specified financial transactions were to be reported in the AIR or SFT.
Vide Notification No.104/2016 dated 15th November, 2016, rule 114E was amended and the following 12th category of transaction being cash deposited during demonitisation period was to be reported by banks and post offices
12.Cash deposits in bank account or a post office account during the period 9th November,2016 to 30th December, 2016 aggregating to :
(i) Rs. 12,50,000 or more in one or more current account of a person or
(ii) Rs.2,50,000 or more in one or more accounts (other than current account) of a person.
Rule 114E has been now been further amended vide Notification No. 2/2017 dated 6th January, 2017 adding the following additional category of transaction (13th) to be reported :
13.Cash Deposits during the period 1st April 2016 to 8th November, 2016 in respect of reportable accounts under serial no. 12
Both the above transactions are to be reported by 31st January 2017 in form No. 61A by the banks and the post offices.
The following Account Summary is to be reported in Part C of the AIR or SFT :
C3 ACCOUNT SUMMARY
C.3.1 Aggregate gross amount credited to the account in cash
C.3.2 Aggregate gross amount debited to the account in cash
C.3.3 Aggregate gross amount credited to the account in cash from 1st April 2016 to 8th November 2016.
C.3.4 Aggregate gross amount credited to the account in cash from 9th November 2016 to 30th December,2016.
C.3.5 Remarks
Whether the amount deposited in PPF A/c during the Demonitisation period should be included in cash deposited in Bank a/c during demonitisation period or not?????
I presume demonetization itself is beyond the power of PM Mr. Modiji – reason is such major decisions ought to have peoples’ approval not MPs or MLAs but through a referendum process, like UK parliament did in Brexit from EU – even today Brexit survives – made Cameron to resign but May succeeded ; it is like my view on ‘secular’ issue in the constitution of India; which is –
Dr chandrachud Dhananjay as justice and two other Justices is no dissent on ‘secularism of the constitution paradigm as such.
It is not to say that the law makers to decide such fundamental issues never meant,
that the present law makers among them includes the opposition law makers.
they need to be taken into consideration,
and that means ‘opposition law makers;
if it was a healthy strong opposition’
that dissent may consider;
but such issues like on the Constitutional preferences has to be decided by the backing of ‘referendum principle’ like in the case of Brexit in the UK; Brexit was adopted through referendum is the obvious way forward for secularism of the constitution ;
so it is obvious their dissent is no dissent on Secular ideals as the members of the constitution bench which said that secularism does not mean the political parties can decide issues by ‘going away’ from the secular fundamental ideals of the constitution of india is my considered opinion;
secularism as such the ‘basic principle of the Indian constitution,
in the similar way even ‘demonetization is; Modi government alone cannot decide the’demonetization’ without referendum to people (referral to the people of india -as citizen is sovereign in india not parliament as it is an instrument under Art 12 it has to refer sch main issues to the people of India, as demonetization is no political policy but people daily issue, so referendum route has to have been adopted by Mod govt, it failed is obvious, that very question is like the UK govt sought referendum on the exit from EU; the referendum said in 52% majority said ‘we have to go out of EU’ – that only made Cameron to resign on the issue; similar position is in India too; for India is based upon the UK or British constitutional principles; though the British constitution is an unwritten constitution,except magna carta and bill of rights; yet it followed ‘referendum’ process – why the British parliamentarians are mentally advanced to ensure the major issues ought to go through the ‘referendum process’ so they followed, they sustained the Breixt even today; so what Mamta WB CM that LK Advaniji ot Arun Jaitleyji be nominated as PM in place of Modiji is indeed a tenable argument, unquestionably as Indian constitution s modelled on the British constitution as also the American constitution is my considered opinion, by default, as she sought for different objective, yet her view is correct constitutionally..