Friday, February 17, 2017

CGPA/KL/GL/2017/18              dated            15-02-2017

To
Shri. Arun Jaitely
Hon’ble Union Minister for Finance
North Block, New Delhi - 110 001

Sub:   Budget proposals 2017-18 – Personal Income Tax- Additional burden on certain low income senior citizens

Respected Sir,

          This Association appreciates the approach of the Government to reduce the burden of taxation of honest tax payers and salaried persons who are showing their income correctly. We also consider that your proposal “to reduce the existing rate of taxation for individual assessees between income of        Rs. 2.5 lakh to Rs. 5 lakh  to 5% from the present rate of 10%” is a welcome step in the right direction. Your claim is that “this would reduce the tax liability of all persons below Rs. 5 lakh income either to zero (with rebate) or their existing liability.” In order not to have duplication of benefit, the existing benefit of rebate available to the same group of beneficiaries is being reduced to Rs. 2500/- available only to assessees upto  income of Rs. 3.5 lakhs (Para 174 of the budget speech).

            We may submit that your present proposal actually increases the tax burden of senior citizens who are in the income bracket of Rs. 3, 50,010/- to Rs. 3,99,990/- though the intention of your proposal is to reduce the tax liability of all persons below Rs. 5 lakh income. For example, the tax liability for a senior citizen having an income of Rs. 3,50,010/- during the F.Y.2016-17 is Re. 1/- only whereas the tax liability for the same person during the F.Y.2017-18 would be Rs. 2576/-  (including the education cess). We may also bring to your notice that the senior citizens have little scope to avail the concession under section 80(C). We earnestly believe that the Hon’ble Finance Minister would not have anticipated this anomalous position.

          As the intention of the Government is to “reduce the tax liability of all persons below Rs. 5 lakh income,” this Association requests you to be gracious to revisit the proposal and amend it to extend the tax rebate of Rs. 2500/- to all persons having a taxable income below Rs. 5 lakhs.

Thanking you,                                                                                               yours faithfully

                                                                                             T.I. Sudhakaran,    General Secretary
Copy to:     

1.       Com. Shiv Gopal Mishra,Secretary, Staff side JCM, 13-C, Feroz Shah Road, New Delhi – 110 001 – For information and necessary action

2.       Com. K.K.N. Kutty, Secretary General, NCCPA, 13-C, Feroz Shah Road, New Delhi – 110 001 – For information and necessary action 

Friday, November 18, 2016

Grant of Dearness Relief to Central Government pensioners/family pensioners - Revised rate effective from 1.7.2016 on implementation of decision taken on recommendation of 7th Central Pay Commission
 (Click the link below to view order)

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

7th CPC recommendation. Pay determination in the case of Pre-2016 pensioners. Option No. I. Examination of feasibility

 7th CPC recommendation. Pay determination in the case of Pre-2016 pensioners. Option No. I. Examination of feasibility

Letter from Secretary JCM Staff Side regarding Option for Parity in Pension 
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE LETTER

Saturday, August 13, 2016

LETTER TO HON 'BLE MINISTER OF FINANCE

CGPA/KL/GL/2016    dated     01-08-2016

To
Shri. Arun Jaitely
Hon’ble Minister of Finance, North Block, New Delhi

Respected Sir,

          The purport and intent of this letter is to invite your kind attention to a perennial injustice being meted out to the employees and pensioners in computing DA / DR by ignoring the fraction element in 12 monthly average of cost of Index. A cursory look at this practice will convince you that employees and pensioners are denied a legitimate claim by way of neutralization of cost of living index fully. Considerable pecuniary loss is being sustained by them by following an irrational practice of computation of DA / DR ignoring the fraction element. This loss is significantly compounded whenever base year for calculation of DA / DR is changed consequent on revision of pay by merging DA with pay. This patent injustice is evidenced in the illustration given below:
Consumer Price Index
Month
Base Year 2001=100
12 monthly average
Increase over 115.76
(Old DA)
Increase over 261.42 (New DA)
June 2016
277
269.00
132.38
2.90

DA/DR Calculation with effect from 01-07-2016

OLD (Rs.)
NEW (Rs.)
DA Computed without
ignoring fraction
Loss in DA
Basic
10000
25700


DA
700
514
746
232

    A well laid principle of preventing erosion of real wages on account of rise in cost of living index is mutilated by pursuing the extant practice. It is respectfully submitted that in the computation of I.D.A., which is quarterly, the fraction element of average index is taken into account which may be adopted in C.D.A. case also. How this irrationality of ignoring the fraction element of average index has crept in the determination of C.D.A. is not easily understandable. Any way it can be affirmed without fear of contradiction that this extant practice deserves to be done away with. This Association earnestly requests you to kindly issue necessary orders putting an end to the unjust practice which cause loss in real wages / pension. Appealing for your benign indulgence in this matter.

Thanking you,                                                                                                         yours faithfully

                                                                                                     T.I. Sudhakaran, General Secretary

Copy to: 1. Shri. Shiv Gopal Mishra, Secretary, Staff Side, JCM, New Delhi
               2. Shri. K.K.N.Kutty, Secretary General, NCCPA, New Delhi