Traders seek penalty exemption till March for errors in filing GST returns

Bengaluru, May 3: Erection of barricades and drawing up of boxes or circles aimed at maintaining social distancing were seen in front of liquor shops in different parts of Karnataka on Sunday, a day ahead of their reopening after a gap of over 40-days, due to the lockdown.

Karnataka Excise Commissioner on Saturday had ordered that only CL-2 (retail shops) and CL-11C (state-run retail shops like Mysore Sales International Limited) would open from May 4.

It had permitted liquor sale liquor between 9 am and 7 pm only in areas that are outside COVID-19 containment zones.

Reports of barricades being erected to ensure that people stand in line and drawing of boxes or circles in front of shops to maintain social distancing in front of retail and MSIL shops have emerged from across the state, including the state capital.

Also reports about shop keepers doing special poojas outside liquor shops in Kolar and some even illuminating their outlets with lights from outside have surfaced from other parts of the state.

Meanwhile, officials were engaged in checking stocks ahead of the shops opening on Monday morning.

"We are making all preparations to ensure that government rules are followed. We also seek the cooperation of the people and police," the manager of a shop said.

Another said there may be a rush initially, after which things may get back to normal.

"We expect things to go on smoothly," he added.

Calling for number of customers to be limited to five at a time while ensuring that they maintain social distancing of not less than six feet distance, the order states that customers and the staff will have to wear masks and sanitizers should be used at the shops.

Only stand alone CL-2 and CL-11C shops are allowed to commence liquor sale and not those at malls and super markets, it said.

Officials in Bengaluru said liquor sale is prohibited in 26 containment zones in the city, while in other places rules that have been prescribed need to be followed.

In case of any violation, strict action would be taken, including imposing of penalty, they said.

There was pressure on the government to kick start economic activities, including allowing sale of liquor, to boost the state's finances as excise is the key area which generates revenue.

State Excise Minister H Nagesh had recently pegged the losses at Rs 60 crore per day because of closure of liquor shops, due to the lockdown.

Mysuru, Jan 12: Karnataka Minister for Primary and Secondary Education S Suresh Kumar on Saturday said that the State government is planning to introduce 'Bag less Day’ in a week from next Academic year across the State.

He said that the State government is also working out on reducing the weight of the School bags carried by children.

The Minister was speaking after inaugurating ‘Civic sense is my duty – Questioning is my right’ programme organised at Kautilya Vidyalaya in Kanakadasanagar here.

In the wake of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) UN High Commissioner, Michele Bachelet, has filed an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act, as she is critical of CAA. Responding to her, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jai Shanker strongly rebutted her criticism, saying that the body (UNHCR) has been wrong and is blind to the problem of cross border terrorism. The issue on hand is the possibility of scores of people, mainly Muslims, being declared as stateless. The problem at hand is the massive exercise of going through the responses/documents from over 120 crore of Indian population and screening documents, which as seen in Assam, yield result which are far from truthful or necessary.

The issue of CAA has been extensively debated and despite heavy critique of the same by large number of groups and despite the biggest mass opposition ever to any move in Independent India, the Government is determined on going ahead with an exercise which is reminiscent of the dreaded regimes which are sectarian and heartless to its citizens, which have indulged in extinction of large mass of people on grounds of citizenship, race etc. The Foreign minister’s assertion is that it is a matter internal to India, where India’s sovereignty is all that matters! As far as sovereignty is concerned we should be clear that in current times any sovereign power has to consider the need to uphold the citizenship as per the principle of non-discrimination which is stipulated in Art.26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political (ICCPR) rights.

Can such policies, which affect large number of people and are likely to affect their citizenship be purely regarded as ‘internal’? With the World turning into a global village, some global norms have been formulated during last few decades. The norms relate to Human rights and migrations have been codified. India is also signatory to many such covenants in including ICCPR, which deals with the norms for dealing with refugees from other countries. One is not talking of Chicago speech of Swami Vivekanand, which said that India’s greatness has been in giving shelter to people from different parts of the World; one is also not talking of the Tattariaya Upanishad’s ‘Atithi Devovhav’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ from Mahaupanishad today.

What are being talked about are the values and opinions of organizations which want to ensure to preserve of Human rights of all people Worldwide. In this matter India is calling United Nations body as ‘foreign party’; having no locus standi in the case as it pertains to India’s sovereignty. The truth is that since various countries are signatories to UN covenants, UN bodies have been monitoring the moves of different states and intervening at legal level as Amicus (Friend of the Court) to the courts in different countries and different global bodies. Just to mention some of these, UN and High Commissioner for Human Rights has often submitted amicus briefs in different judicial platforms. Some examples are their intervention in US Supreme Court, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are meant to help the Courts in areas where UN bodies have expertise.

 Expertise on this has been jointly formulated by various nations. These interventions also remind the nations as to what global norms have been evolved and what are the obligations of individual states to the values which have evolved over a period of time. Arvind Narrain draws our attention to the fact that, “commission has intervened in the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving Spain and Italy to underscore the principle of non-refoulement, which bars compulsory expulsion of illegal migrants… Similarly, the UN has intervened in the International Criminal Court in a case against the Central African Republic to explicate on the international jurisprudence on rape as a war crime.”

From time to time organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been monitoring the status of Human rights of different countries. This puts those countries in uncomfortable situation and is not welcome by those establishments. How should this contradiction between ‘internal matter’, ‘sovereignty’ and the norms for Human rights be resolved? This is a tough question at the time when the freedom indices and democratic ethos are sliding downwards all over the world. In India too has slid down on the scale of these norms.

In India we can look at the intervention of UN body from the angle of equality and non discrimination. Democratic spirit should encourage us to have a rethink on the matters which have been decided by the state. In the face of the greatest mass movement of Shaheen bagh, the state does need to look inwards and give a thought to international morality, the spirit of global family to state the least.

The popular perception is that when Christians were being persecuted in Kandhmal the global Christian community’s voice was not strong enough. Currently in the face of Delhi carnage many a Muslim majority countries have spoken. While Mr. Modi claims that his good relations with Muslim countries are a matter of heartburn to the parties like Congress, he needs to relook at his self gloating. Currently Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia and many Muslim majority countries have spoken against what Modi regime is unleashing in India. Bangladesh, our neighbor, has also seen various protests against the plight of Muslims in India. More than the ‘internal matter’ etc. what needs to be thought out is the moral aspect of the whole issue. We pride ourselves in treading the path of morality. What does that say in present context when while large section of local media is servile to the state, section of global media has strongly brought forward what is happening to minorities in India.   

The hope is that Indian Government wakes up to its International obligations, to the worsening of India’s image in the World due to CAA and the horrific violence witnessed in Delhi.