Siddaramaiah challenges BSY himself to contest from Varuna and win

New Delhi, May 9: The Finance Ministry on Friday announced relief to those who have been facing difficulty with their residency status in India under section 6 of the Income-tax Act due to lockdown and suspension of international flights owing to COIVD-19 outbreak, as they have had to prolong their stay in India.

According to a Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) release, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman today allowed discounting of prolonged stay period in India for the purpose of determining residency status after considering various representations received from people who had to prolong their stay in India due to lockdown and suspension of international flights.

They expressed concern that they will be required to file tax returns as Indian residents and not as NRIs after 120 days of stay.

The Finance Ministry stated that the lockdown continues during the financial year 2020-21 and it is not yet clear when international flight operations would resume, a circular excluding the period of stay of these individuals up to the date of resumption of international flight operations shall be issued for determination of the residential status for the financial year 2020-21.

A circular also said that in order to avoid genuine hardship in such cases, the CBDT has decided that for the purposes of determining the residential status under section 6 of the Act during the previous year 2019-20 in respect of an individual who has come to India on a visit before March 22, 2020 and:

(a) has been unable to leave India on or before March 31, 2020, his period of stay in India from March 22, 2020 to March 31, 2020 shall not be taken into account; or

(b) has been quarantined in India on account of novel coronavirus (Covid-19) on or after March 1, 2020 and has departed on an evacuation flight on or before March 31, 2020 or has been unable to leave India on or before March 31, 2020, his period of stay from the beginning of his quarantine to his date of departure or March 31, 2020, as the case may be, shall not be taken into account; or

(c) has departed on an evacuation flight on or before March 31, 2020, his period of stay in India from March 22, 2020 to his date of departure shall not be taken into account."

The release said there are number of individuals who had come on a visit to India during the previous year 2019-20 for a particular duration and intended to leave India before the end of the previous year for maintaining their status as non-resident or not ordinary resident in India.

"However, due to declaration of the lockdown and suspension of international flights owing to outbreak of COVID-19, they are required to prolong their stay in India. The status of an individual whether he is resident in India or a non-resident or not ordinarily resident, is dependent, inter-alia, on the period for which the person is in India during a year," it said.

Bengaluru, Jan 20: The suspense over chief minister BS Yediyurappa expanding his council of ministers is set to continue until after he returns from his trip to attend the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland.

Yediyurappa, who heads a 10-member delegation to the Swiss ski resort, left on Sunday. Prior to his departure, he told reporters cabinet expansion will happen only after his return on January 24. “I discussed the issue with [BJP] national president Amit Shah for 30 minutes or so. He has given a positive response and I will expand the cabinet within two days after my return,” Yediyurappa said.

But sources said Shah, during his visit to Hubballi on Saturday, had indicated the exercise is likely to be delayed further as the central leadership will be busy with the assembly elections in Delhi. “Indications are there is no possibility of expanding the cabinet until February 11 when the electoral process for the Delhi elections ends,” said a source.

The development has obviously left ministerial aspirants, especially defectors from Congress and JD(S) who were re-elected on BJP tickets last month, restive. Moreover, while Yediyurappa has promised ministerial berths to all MLAs who switched to the BJP from Congress and JD(S), sources say Shah is only in favour of inducting six defectors (11 of whom won MLA seats on saffron party tickets in the byelections) into the cabinet.

“Shah’s advice to Yediyurappa is to strike a balance between defectors and loyalists. His concern is loyalists should not be left disappointed, while justice should be served to the defectors as well,” said a BJP functionary.

Meanwhile, KS Eshwarappa, senior party functionary and minister for rural development, said the BJP would never let down the defectors. “The party is indebted to them and I am sure they will all be rewarded,” he said.

BC Patil, one of the defectors, said some of them had met Shah in one-on-one meetings in Hubballi. “It was more a courtesy call and the issue of cabinet expansion didn’t come up during the meeting,” he said.

Bengaluru, May 19: Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa-led Karnataka government has recommended the withdrawal of 46 cases against leaders belonging to Sangh Parivar who had apparently involved in violence during the birth anniversary celebration of Tipu Sultan in the state. 

These cases – ranging from very serious forms of assaults on Muslims to unlawful assembly – were registered across Karnataka between 2014 and 2018.

Among the cases recommended to be withdrawn include those registered against senior state BJP leader Sanjay Patil, VHP leader Swaroop Kalkundri, and several district level Bajrang Dal activists. 

The government recommended withdrawal of these cases under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on March 5. 

The recommendations, however, have been opposed by three crucial law enforcement departments – Director General and Inspector General of Police (DG & IGP), Director-Department of prosecution and Government litigation and Law department. 

While the DG & IGP has opined that these cases “cannot be withdrawn”, both the department of prosecution and law have observed that these are “not a fit case to withdraw”.