Sanjha Morcha

From next year, national database for gun licence holders Arms licences to have unique ID from April 2019

From next year, national database for gun licence holders

New Delhi, July 16

Come April 2019, names of all arms licence holders — new or old — will be included in a national database and they will be issued a unique identification number (UIN), according to the Home Ministry.

The move is aimed at keeping a tab on authorised private gun holders, many of whom are often found involved in crimes and celebratory firing leading to loss of lives.

Every licensing and renewing authority will have to enter the data in the National Database of Arms Licenses system, which will generate a UIN, and with effect from April 1, 2019, any arms licence without UIN shall be considered invalid, the ministry said in a notification.

The decision has been taken by exercising powers under Section 44 of the Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959) by amending the Arms Rules, 2016. These rules will be called the Arms (Second Amendment) Rules, 2018.

Additionally, any existing licencee holding multiple licences — under Form III — shall on or before April 1 make an application for grant of a single licence in respect of all firearms held by him or her under his or her UIN to the licensing authority concerned.

Where the applicant applying for a licence for restricted category of arms or ammunition is also a holder of a licence for permissible category, or where the applicant applying for permissible category of arms or ammunition is also a holder of a licence for restricted category, the licensing authority concerned shall issue a new licence for restricted or permissible category of arms or ammunition under the existing UIN of the licencee, the notification said.

Separate licence books will be generated in case of each licence, separately for restricted and permissible categories of arms and ammunition with an overall ceiling of three firearms under a single UIN, it said.

Home Ministry officials said the amendments will eliminate the possibilities of issuing arms licence to persons whose antecedents are not bona fide.

Under Section 3 of the Arms Act, it is essential to obtain an arms possession licence issued by a competent licensing authority, by any person for acquisition, possession or carrying any firearms or ammunition. PTI

By no stretch of imagination can the military be compared to IAS and IPS officers

Army, Navy & Air Force have to climb out of their respective silos, cease empire building, and create a joint plan to address military angst

Military officers have asked for parity with IAS and IPS officers, complaining time and again that they don’t climb ranks fast enough. The anger at the civil services, however, doesn’t justify the solutions the armed forces seem to be identifying for their ailments.

The latest attempt to find a solution has resulted in a proposal to do away with the rank of the Army brigadier. A study was commissioned by chief Bipin Rawat last month to help with the cadre restructuring. It also sought to address the three main issues plaguing the armed forces for more than 30 years: degradation of ranks, lower pay scales, and warrant of precedence.

The angst due to these issues has been most apparent ever since the deployment of the armed forces, especially the Army, increased exponentially. In military law, this is called ‘aid to civil authority’ or the deployment of armed forces for the aid of the government and the community. This ‘aid’ has become well-nigh permanent in India, as have ranks, precedence, and pay scales.

The Army seems to be copying the Joneses by proposing to prune the number of ranks so as to bring a semblance of equality with the civil services. Not a good starting point at all. Especially since the Indian military is an age-old institution which has barely been tinkered with in terms of structure, deployment and functioning.

It remains largely the expeditionary force it was created as in the pre-World War I era. Therefore, even today, the armed forces remain expeditionary in structure, command, and control. But the Indian state, which governs the military, is now largely insular, and that is where the civil-military complications become acuter.

In the largely internal deployment of the armed forces, motivated and bright officers meet their civilian counterparts who head districts, as collectors or as police chiefs. The comparison begins there: A young captain, who wears the rank of a second-in-command in the Army, and the superintendent of police, who is a three-star officer, after the same number of years in service.

As both IAS and IPS officers go up in the ranks of service, the gap in seniority gets wider and at a faster pace.

This resentment gives rise to the anger and frustration in the armed forces. More fire-fighting attempts are made to gain parity and rejoin the race. But each attempt completely misses the crucial point– there need not be a race at all.

By no stretch of imagination can the armed forces be equated with the UPSC-selected civil or police service. Their roles are completely different, and those who have joined the various services have done so voluntarily, knowing what the qualifications needed are.

When the basic requirement of soldiering are at complete variance with civil administration, why should the armed forces be seeking parity in the first place? And if they are seeking parity, it means that there has been a degradation for which the society and the leadership of the armed forces are responsible.

These dilutions and diminishing of ranks haven’t happened overnight, but are the result of political oversight, civilian manipulation, and a lot of military ignorance in governance. The solution then cannot come from within the military alone but also has to come from the government.

Cadre reviews of the past ultimately became sops for a few ranks, looked good for some years, and then horrendously unwieldy as time went by. The current cadre review and the tentative proposals in it appear to be headed in the same direction. In lay terms, it is simply denting work, rather than anything substantive.

For anything substantial to happen, the armed forces will first have to set up a joint committee to oversee any cadre review. Only the Navy, Air Force, or the Army doing it alone, as in this case, simply perpetuates the problem. After all, the three services have to work closer together than with any other government bodies. Which means they need to be on the same page and seniority in order to arrive at a solution. The Army jettisoning one rank complicates the problem further since their equivalent ranks will continue to exist in the Navy and Air Force, with military protocol and precedence under greater stress.

The three services should climb out of their respective silos, cease empire building, and formulate a joint plan. Since silos and empires are not easy to destroy, the three services can first prepare for a separate armed forces pay commission. The success of which will pave the way for greater cooperation, integration and hopefully, modernisation of the military structure.

Precedence and parity will be a hole-in-one after that.

Manvendra Singh is editor-in-chief of Defence & Security Alert. He is presently a BJP MLA in the Rajasthan assembly and former member of the Parliament Standing Committee on Defence.

More than my wife: When IAF Squadron Leader Meet Kumar, killed in MiG 21 crash, narrated his love for the jet

More than my wife: When IAF Squadron Leader Meet Kumar, killed in MiG 21 crash, narrated his love for the jet

Eyewitnesses recall that even during the last minutes, he appeared to have steered away the aircraft from the civilian area towards the fields to ensure that no harm was caused to the people living in that locality.

NEW DELHI: Indian Air Force (IAF) Squadron Leader Meet Kumar, flying a MiG-21 fighter jet, took off from Pathankot air base on Wednesday on a routine sortie. A little about an hour later, the aircraft crashed near Kangra in Himachal Pradesh, killing the officer who shared a very special bond with the jet and had spent more time with it than his wife.

Eyewitnesses recall that even during the last minutes, he appeared to have steered away the aircraft from the civilian area towards the fields to ensure that no harm was caused to the people living in that locality.

As soon as the news of the crash and his unfortunate death came out, a video shot by the Indian Air Force – A Date With An Airwarrior – featuring him went viral. Dressed up in his uniform, with his gear on, Squadron Leader Meet Kumar, can be heard recalling the special bondthat he shared with this machine, which he said was much more than his love for his wife.


Here is the transcript of his statement:

“My name is Squadron Leader Meet Kumar. I am posted to 18 Squad. I have been flying this beautiful machine called MiG-21.”

“This machine is a multi-role aircraft wherein it can undertake any sort of missions. This aircraft is, particularly for a high landing speed. Every landing is different. On this aircraft, we have a 57 mm rocket. We can carry high-calibre and low calibre bombs. The aircraft is capable of carrying 8 bombs at a time and when you are flying this aircraft, you feel none other than God.”

“The bond that I share with this machine is very rare. It is more than my wife. We know each other very well. I have spent more time with this machine than my wife.”

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman expressed “deep grief” over his death. “Our heartfelt condolences to the family of brave pilot Sqn Ldr Meet Kumar, who we lost in the fateful crash,” she said. A Court of Inquiry (COI) has been ordered into the accident.

This is not the first instance of a pilot being killed in a MiG crash. In fact, the IAF has been grappling with rising incidents of accidents involving its flying platforms.

Minister of State for Defence Subhash Bhamre had on Wednesday told the Lok Sabha that a total of 25 accidents involving IAF aircraft have been reported since 2015-16. He said that a total of 39 people died in the accidents and that IAF lost all the aircraft involved in the crashes. He said there were five accidents involving aircraft of the Army during the period in which four people were killed.

The MiG-21 jets were inducted into IAF in the early 1960s and many of these planes have been lost in crashes.

Operation ‘Jubaida’: How 3,367 gun licences were procured in the name of Indian Army personnel

Jaipur, July 18: This case has all the makings of a huge racket. Under the scanner of the Rajasthan ATS are over 3,000 gun licences that were allegedly issued in the name of Army personnel during their stint in the troubled state of Jammu and Kashmir. The ATS has now asked for the names of the personnel to be verified by the Army. ATS sources tell OneIndia that a gang that procures weapons illegally may have used the name of Army personnel. Representational Image It all began with Operation Jubaida, in which the Rajasthan ATS arrested 52 people after it was found that they had got gun licences issued from different districts in Jammu and Kashmir. It was also found that at least 3,367 gun licences were procured by using names of the Army personnel. It was also found that all the licences were issued by the respective Deputy Commissioners over the past decade. The ATS also found that no records were maintained for the same. Response awaited: The ATS had written letters to the Army, Indian Air Force, Navy, Border Security Force, CRPF, NCC, RPF, NDRF and the Coast Guard. While the ATS received a response from most, the Army submitted a list of 375 personnel. ATS officials say that the Army list however did not have the time period. The ATS says that the list needs to be more comprehensive and hence it had sent out another request to the Army. The ATS says it would need the entire list of personnel and also the time period of when the personnel had served in Jammu and Kashmir. This is a case which has major security implications and hence needs to be cracked, the ATS officer also said. The Navy on the other hand informed the ATS that out of the 26 personnel, only 14 cases were genuine. The ATS is now finding out how the remaining persons posed as Navy officials and secured the licence. In the IAF list, the credentials of 17 out of the 39 were found to be genuine. Out of the 548 personnel from the BSF, records for 471 were received of which cases of only 336 personnel were found to be correct. In the CRPF list out of the 424, 237 were correct. In the other lists, only 154 of the 387 personnel were found to be correct. Larger nexus: ATS officials say that this is a huge racket. It appears as though the names of many personnel have been picked at random and gun licences sourced in their names. Under the scanner are also those officials in J&K who could be hand in glove with this syndicate. Once we receive all the information, we could probe further into the matter, the official also added. This racket is rampant in Jammu and Kashmir and in the month of March 2018, the Jammu police busted a fake gun licence racket. Investigations led to the police recovering 52 fake gun licences and several blank licence forms. It was found that the accused persons were preparing both fake and forged gun licences by using the stamps of Army officials and those in the civil administration. The police conducted raids and arrested two persons in connection with this case. They were identified ass Taranjeet Singh and Satinder Singh, both residents of Jammu. The police had also recovered stamps of the Army and civil administration.

Read more at:

Income Tax: Did you get notice under Section 143(1) (a) of I-T Act? Here is what it means

As per latest amendments and provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with the Assessment Year 2018-19, there are various new provisions related to income tax proceedings and assessment procedure being included.

When a difference of income arises in income tax return with the Form 16, Form 16A and Form 26AS in case of salaried income, Capital gain income.

As per latest amendments and provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with the Assessment Year 2018-19, there are various new provisions related to income tax proceedings and assessment procedure being included. A new section has been inserted with the assessment year 2018-19 called as 143(1)(a). The provisions of Section 143(1)(a) provides that when an assessee files income tax return for the assessment year 2018-19 onwards, there has to be clarity on the data which is filing in the income tax return. The data should be very authentic.

Why and when a notice u/s 143(1)(a) is issued?
According to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with section 143(1)(a) where any assessee files its return of income not correctly and by mistakenly it provides the details of income and deductions, in such case the notice would be issued. Sometimes notices under Section 143(1)(a) are issued by Income Tax Department without detailed analysis. Following are some reasons by which notice can be issued:

When a difference of income arises in income tax return with the Form 16, Form 16A and Form 26AS in case of salaried income, Capital gain income.

Income is offered in the income tax return in a different head of income against the section under which TDS has been deducted. For instance TDS deducted u/s 194J and income is shown as Salary in the ITR.

When Business Receipts shown as gross level under the head “Income from business or profession” may not be comparable with the receipts shown in form 16, Form 16A and Form 26AS.

Any items related to P&L such as commission, interest, and revenue etc. shown as net income basis where as in Form16, Form 16A & Form 26AS shown it as gross income basis.

When deductions and exempt allowances claimed at the time of filing of ITR but not available in Form 16.

Income and receipts when offered in previous year and TDS is claimed in financial year, it can also be a reason of issuing the notice under this section.

When we accrue the income on FDR but not shown in the income tax return, due to this variation notice can be issued.

Income which is not taxable in India due to various reasons. For Instance in case of non-resident income would be exempt if in the countries there be DTAA exists.

How to respond

There is a online process to filing the response of the notice with the department. You have to follow the following procedure to make response with the department:
n First of all need to accumulate the return of income which is filed, relevant documents, Form 16A, Form 26AS and find out the reasons of issuance of notice.

Go to ‘e-Proceeding’ menu option and where as you will find ‘e-Assessment option.

After that, you will have to click on adjustments under section 143(1)(a).

After this you will find there are options on the online portal that you have to make response i.e. Agree, Disagree.

If you are agree with the demand or notice which is issued then necessary modifications and adjustment you have to do and have file a revise return with paying also additional tax which department demands.

If you are disagree with the adjustments, then you will have to file the valid reasons thereof of disagreeing of that notice or demand at the online portal.

Ganesh Kumawat is a chartered accountant
Source: Tax Guru

Get live Stock Prices from BSE and NSE and latest NAV, portfolio of Mutual Funds, calculate your tax by Income Tax Calculator, know market’s Top GainersTop Losers & Best Equity Funds. Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

China builds defences in PoK territory India claims, carries out joint patrols with Pakistan

The region is the sparsely populated Khunjerab Pass in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which is part of the CPEC that India opposes. 

New Delhi: China is ramping up its defences and patrolling the Khunjerab Pass with Pakistani troops in territory that India claims, satellite imagery analysed by The Print shows.

The area is north of the Siachen Glacier and crucial to the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) that India has opposed because it passes through Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK). The CPEC will be passing through the Karakoram mountains.

China’s Ministry of National Defence site says Chinese and Pakistani troops patrolled the Khunjerab Pass jointly on 26 June.

“Chinese and Pakistan frontier defence forces discuss Chinese-Pakistan border situation during a joint border patrol at a mountainous region in Khunjerab in northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region,” the website says.

Pakistan’s online media platform The Nation used the same words in its report a day later.

Despite the joint patrol, India is not known to have lodged even a formal diplomatic protest. This contrasts sharply with New Delhi’s actions a year ago when its troops stepped into Bhutan to stop a Chinese road that was being built through the Doklam plateau.

The imagery also reveals an unfinished road that leads from the new fortifications on the Khunjerab Pass towards the Shaksgam Valley, territory that New Delhi believes was illegally ceded by Pakistan to China. Shaksgam is beyond Indira Col the farthest point to the north east of the Siachen Glacier.
The Khunjerab Pass is barely 50km northwest of the mouth of Shaksgam Valley where road construction was exposed by ThePrint in an earlier report.
Here’s what the latest satellite imagery reveals:

Joint patrol

The Khunjerab Pass area is sparsely populated. It is occupied by China through the year but manned by Pakistan only during the summer months when the Karakoram Highway is open.

Col. Vinayak Bhat (retd) /

China has built a huge 27m X 12m wide four-storey gate-like building at Khunjerab Pass, almost the size of a basketball court.

It is probably manned by the PLA and some immigration staff. Just behind this building is a hexagonal watch tower manned by the PLA. There is a double-wire fence running north-west to south-east from the tower.

The first joint patrol was conducted at the behest of China when troops of both countries walked along the double fence till its end, shook hands and returned.

The patrol was reported by The Diplomat, a Tokyo-based online paper in July 2016 , but got scant attention in Indian media.

This time round, Pakistan permitted the Chinese to intrude into the Indian side of the fence which is visible clearly in pictures published by Chinese MND.

The comparison of the picture with satellite imagery shows geo-location of the exact spot of the patrol party. The single fence from the gate-like building is not clearly visible to an untrained eye. It is indicated with a green line.

Immigration post

The immigration post is about 3.5 km down the road where a blue-topped building with eight bays are located. This is where vehicles are checked manually as well as electronically.

Col. Vinayak Bhat (retd) /

This building used to house a small check post prior to last July’s Doklam stand-off in Bhutan between Indian and Chinese troops and was later expanded to eight bays.

There are two more barricades where possibly documents are re-checked for down traffic. A headquarters building and staff quarters for immigration department is also observed.

A communication node and a few trenches for local defence of the area are noticed slightly above the buildings.

PLA post

The PLA post is 17 km from the immigration post along the same road. It has been steadily upgraded from a company post to a battalion post over the past two decades.

The post has been further upgraded after the Doklam incident with a new building and new garage under construction.

Col. Vinayak Bhat (retd) /

The PLA post has two square-shaped helipads, a communication node, an obstacle course and a firing range.

The post has coal and fuel for warming and generators for electricity. Solar power caters to additional requirements.

The complete post is surrounded by trenches and fencing for security.

Road to nowhere

A fair-weather road originates from this post towards the east. It quickly turns south-east and covers a distance of 15 km, after which it abruptly ends at a river junction.

Col. Vinayak Bhat (retd) /

There are no villages in sight as well. When plotted on Google Earth and zoomed out, it provides clear access to a 42km-long valley until the beginning of Shaksgam.

China may be planning to extend the road to Shaksgam Valley in the near future, shortening the distance between Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) and Tibet.

‘Army wants Maj Gen, not Col, as minimum retirement rank’ Faster promotions for all

'Army wants Maj Gen, not Col, as minimum retirement rank'

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, July 17

In what could change the 200-year-old British-established military rank structure, an Indian Army internal note says the minimum rank for officers at the time of retirement should be Major General. It suggests the number of regular commissioned officers be reduced, the rank of Brigadier be done away with while quicker promotions be given to all officers.A nine-page note has been submitted to the cadre review committee headed by the Military Secretary, a Lt General-rank officer. Sources said these were only proposals and suggestions, and that the committee would take a call after due deliberations.It’s the first review of the 39,000-strong Army’s officer cadre since 1984. On June 18, the Army ordered a study to restructure the force and a report has to be submitted by November-end. The Tribune was the first to publish this in its edition dated June 23.At present, the minimum retirement rank is Colonel, which is a selection post. Those who fail to make it during the first selection done after 15-17 years of service are promoted after 26 years. There are about 4,100 Colonel-rank and 280 Major General-rank posts in the Army.“It is essential that every regular Army officer is able to reach SAG (senior administrative grade) posts,” says the note. “At present, the IPS has over 26 per cent officers in SAG and above (that is higher administrative grade) while the Army has only about 1 per cent.”While Major General is a SAG-level post, those of Brigadier and Colonel aren’t. There about 1,050 Brigadier-level posts, a step between Colonel and Major General. “It is advisable the rank of Brigadier be dropped. The command of a brigade (some 4,500 strong) and division (some 14,000-15,000 strong) both be assigned to a Major General,” the note says.

Align the Army with the ideal cadre structure for group-A central services adopted by the Department of Personnel and Training in 2010, says the note.

The first Rank of Lieutenant be given during last year of training.  The rank of Captain should become the first rank at Commissioning.

An officer be made a Major after five years in service instead of 6-8 years. Similarly, an officer be promoted as Lt Col, Colonel, Maj Gen and Lt General after 10 years, 14-15 years, 20-21 years and 28-29 years, respectively.

At present promotions are done after 13 years, 15-17 years, 32-33 years and 35-37 years, respectively. An officer gets promoted as Brigadier after 22-26 years of service.

The note says, “There is a need to consider reducing strength of officer cadre.”

Some 25-30 per cent vacancies be given to direct entry Junior Commissioned Officers (JCO).

At present, the JCO rises from the non-officer ranks after serving for 20-22 years, a direct entry system is already under discussion.

“Having a large officer cadre has been the biggest hurdle in fulfilling the aspirations,” it says.

Gallantry award winner Army officer moves HC over denial of benefits by Haryan

Gallantry award winner Army officer moves HC over denial of benefits by Haryana

The Army officer was told the case was not covered under the Haryana government policy “and incident occurred during the peace time”.

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, July 18

An Army Major, presented gallantry award on August 15, 2009, by the President for displaying exemplary courage in hostage rescue operation in Trident-Oberoi hotel by NSG commando during the Mumbai terror attack, on Wednesday moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court against the denial of benefits to him by the Haryana government.He was told that Mumbai operation was not declared war by the Government of India. As such, he was not eligible for award money. In his petition placed before the Bench of Justice Rajiv Narain Raina, Major Karamjeet Singh Yadav stated he was deputed with the National Security Guard during ‘Operation Black Tornado’ in Mumbai from November 26 to November 30, 2008.After the gallantry award, the petitioner applied for one-time cash award in accordance with the policy of the Haryana government “for war-time and peace time gallantry award for Defence personnel”.The petitioner asserted he received a letter on January 25, 2011, that his claim for cash award had been turned down by secretary, Rajya Sainik Board, Haryana. He was told that the case was not covered under the Haryana government policy “and incident occurred during the peace time”. He added the stand in the letter was “totally illegal and not according to the law”. Claiming that the petitioner was clearly denied of all benefits despite his entitlement, Major Yadav said it was clearly “in violation of fundamental rights of citizen of India and it is clearly violation of Constitution of India of the Article of 14 & 16”