PFI slaps legal notice on Times Now over ‘baseless allegations’

Mumbai, Jan 28: Flag carrier Air India has kept one of its 423-seater jumbo planes ready in Mumbai for the evacuation of Indian citizens from Wuhan in China in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak in that country, an official source said on Tuesday.

The airline is awaiting necessary approvals from the ministries of external affairs and health to operate the special flight, the source said. The health ministry's nod is required because the operating crew has to fly in a virus outbreak territory.

"We have kept a Boeing 747-400 ready in Mumbai to operate an evacuation flight to China whenever we get a go ahead from the government," the source said.

Some 250 Indians are to be evacuated.

At a meeting of top secretaries called by the cabinet secretary on Monday, the government decided to be prepared for possible evacuation of Indian nationals in Wuhan.

Accordingly, Ministry of External Affairs will make a request to the Chinese authorities for evacuation of Indian nationals, mostly students, stuck in Wuhan city. The Ministry of Civil Aviation and Ministry of Health will make arrangements for transport and quarantine facilities respectively, an official release said on Monday.

Wuhan along 12 other cities have been completely sealed by the Chinese authorities to stop the virus from spreading. The death toll climbed to 80 with 2,744 confirmed cases.

New Delhi, Jun 13: In a bid to provide relief to small businesses amid the coronavirus pandemic, the GST Council on Friday decided to halve the interest rate on late filing of GSTR-3B returns for the period of February, March and April 2020.

The interest rate on late return filing will be 9% from the usual 18% till September 30, 2020. The benefit will be available for small taxpayers with aggregate turnover of up to Rs 5 crore.

For the three months, small taxpayers will not be charged any interest till the notified dates for relief and thereafter 9% interest will be charged till September 30, a Finance Ministry statement said.

"For small taxpayers (aggregate turnover upto Rs 5 crore), for the supplies effected in the month of February, March and April 2020, the rate of interest for late furnishing of return for the said months beyond specified dates (staggered upto 6th July 2020) is reduced from 18 per cent per annum to 9 per cent per annum till 30.09.2020," said the statement.

The Council has also extended relief to small taxpayers for subsequent period of 2020 through waiver of late fees and interest if the returns in Form GSTR-3B for the supplies effected in the months of May, June and July are furnished by September 2020.

It has also decided to reduce the late fee on the filing of GSTR-3B returns for the period between July 2017 and January 2020. The late fee has been capped at Rs 500, but interest will be charged at the existing rate on the due tax liability.

Speaking to the media in New Delhi after a GST Council meet through videoconference, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said that those entities with no tax liability will not have to submit the late fee for the period.

For entities with tax liability but which have not filed returns or have filed returns late, the late fee has been capped at Rs 500 without interest. Interest will, however, be payable on the tax component at the applicable rate for delays.

To facilitate taxpayers who could not get their cancelled GST registrations restored in time, the Council has provided an opportunity for filing of application for revocation of cancellation of registration up to September 30, 2020, in all cases where registrations have been cancelled till June 12, 2020.

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.