Contact Your Financial Adviser Money Making MC
21
April 2017
 |
| Aadhar Card(The Total Investment & Insurance Solutions) |
Coming
down heavily on the Narendra Modi government, the Supreme Court on Friday asked
how they could make Aadhaar mandatory when the apex court has made it optional.
The Court also asked the Centre to justify the need for making Aadhaar
mandatory for filing income tax returns (ITRs). The Total Investment & Insurance Solutions
The
Court said it will examine next week the constitutional validity of central
government's decision to link the Aadhaar with the permanent account number
(PAN) card.
Mukul
Rohatgi, the Attorney General was quoted in the reports as saying that "We
found a number of PAN cards being used to divert funds to shell companies. To
prevent it, the only option is to make Aadhaar mandatory."
The
Bench of Justice AK Sikri, and Justice Ashok Bhushan, asked the Attorney
General that “Is this the remedy? Forcibly asking people to get Aadhaar cards?”
The
court was hearing a petition filed by former Kerala Minister Binoy Viswam,
represented by senior advocate Arvind Datar and advocate Sriram Prakkat, challenging
the constitutionality of Section 139AA inserted in the Income Tax Act by the
Finance Act, 2017.
The
Attorney General argued that it was a mandatory requirement under Section 139A
of the Income Tax Act to allot PAN and Aadhaar is only being linked to
it.
Mr
Datar contended that the Aadhaar Act itself does not make obtaining Aadhaar
mandatory. “Going by the Attorney General 's logic about fake PANs, I get a PAN
card on the basis of showing my Aadhaar as proof. Aadhaar is a basic document
along with driving licence. By making Aadhaar mandatory under Section 139AA, my
PAN become invalid. This has serious consequences," he said. The Total Investment & Insurance Solutions
In
his petition, Mr Viswam, former minister from Kerala, had stated that “Section
139AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which makes enrolment for Aadhaar mandatory,
without making appropriate amendments to the Aadhaar Act which till date does
not prescribe that the enrolment is mandatory, in a Finance Bill was with the
intention of avoiding the Rajya Sabha where the ruling party does not have a
majority. It is submitted that the said amendment is completely contrary to
Article 110 of the Constitution, which defines a Money Bill."
The
Modi government had enacted the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and
Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act of 2016 as a Money Bill. However,
Congress MP and former Union Minister Jairam Ramesh had challenged this
enactment in the apex court.
Ever
since Finance Minister Arun Jaitly announced to link Aadhaar number with PAN
card and mandatory for filing ITR, several people are finding it difficult to
link both due to mismatch in data fields. Over the years, PAN cards are known
as linked with Income Tax and ITRs and are issued through a verification
process. The same cannot be said to be true for Aadhaar as it is the private
companies that collect the data, which is never verified or audited by any
government agency or authority. The Total
Investment & Insurance Solutions
The
Supreme Court had time and again restricted use of unique identification (UID)
number or Aadhaar to public distribution system (PDS) Scheme, the liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG) distribution scheme, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural
Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), National Social Assistance Programme
(Old Age Pensions, Widow Pensions, Disability Pensions), Prime Minister's Jan
Dhan Yojana (PMJDY) and Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO).
The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasised that the UID number where
permitted “is purely voluntary and it cannot be made mandatory till the matter
is finally decided by the Court one way or the other“.
On
15 October 2015, the Constitution Bench of Supreme Court led by the then Chief
Justice HL Dattu had ruled that no person shall be deprived of services such as
MNREGA, Jan Dhan Yojana, pension and provident fund schemes for want of
Aadhaar. The Bench even hinted that the government risked contempt of Court if
it chooses to continue to make Aadhaar number a mandatory condition. The Total Investment & Insurance Solutions
Earlier
on 23 September 2013, a bench of Justice J Chelameswar, Justice SA Bobde and
Justice C Nagappan, without going into concrete examples, had said: "In
certain quarters, Aadhaar are being insisted on by various authorities." The Total Investment & Insurance Solutions
"...no
person should suffer for not getting the Aadhaar in spite of the fact that some
authorities had issued a circular making it mandatory and when any person
applies to get the Aadhaar voluntarily, it may be checked whether that person
is entitled for it under the law and it should not be given to any illegal
immigrant," the apex court had said in its order.The Total Investment & Insurance Solutions
No comments:
Post a Comment