taking dd favouring LIC on 31st march 2010
mahendrakumar
(Querist) 02 May 2010
This query is : Resolved
I invite your kind attention to an "unhealthy" discussion taking place on the forum.
a reader posted a query whether by taking a dd favouring lic on 31st,march 2010 and sent the same by regd post to the lic branch. LiC has accounted the same on 07th april 2010 .Is the party enttled to claim for rebate on 2009-2010?
My contention was since the lic has received the premium during 2010-11, he is not entitled to claim rebate for 2009-10.
For this a senior expert of this forum has accused me of giving answers of unfounded nature and out of intuitions.
even if i am wrong in my answers, i do
not think any here is authorised to make such sarcastic remarks.
Hope some one respond in this.
Vineet
(Expert) 02 May 2010
Do agree with you. The debates should be healthy and avoid such remarks.
A V Vishal
(Expert) 02 May 2010
Complain to the Admin, I stand by what I said Mr Mahendra, I have noticed Non professionals giving wrong advises here in this forum, I have seen N number of such instances, further this forum is meant for professional guidance by professionals, if every one is an expert in his own way then I presume that it is sheer waste of our hard work.
mahendrakumar
(Querist) 03 May 2010
Mr. Vishal.
You could also make complaint to the admin for allowing Non Professionals making wrong advises in this forum.
I have seen many professionals making wrong advices. It is not intentional on their part, and many of them were on sometimes boarder line cases like ours.
well that does not mean whoever noticing it should question it with sarcastic comments.
i do not know who you are nor does you know about me and we are never likely to know even further.
I thought an apology from you,if the remark was made inadvertently.
well,it is a matter of decency,which cannot be attained by any level of professional qualification and the same was proved by you by your above statement.
Good bye Mr.Vishal, i leave it here, for other experts/admin.
A V Vishal
(Expert) 03 May 2010
I have already brought the matter to the notice of the Admin, well you yourself have strenghtened my statement by admitting "dear vineet,may be you are correct. well,i have replied based on the practice."It is taking a painkiller for any type of pain without diagonising the cause/reason for the pain. It was very unprofessional advise based on practise since it will do more harm than good to the querist, who come here to seek the right advise. Further I have brought to the notice of admin from time to time about the quality of advises given by the professionals also and as far as decency is concerned I need not get certified by anyone what matters me is only the facts and truth and not decency and diplomacy even for which I may sound harsh.
mahendrakumar
(Querist) 03 May 2010
i do agree that you need not get certified by anyone in this regard.
atleast admit that you have not right to use such kind of remarks on anyone's post.
if you disagree to the views expressed,you may do that and you have every right for the same.
had i reciprocated by harsh words,well, it would be of no use to both of us.
In the instant case, you have not established your correctness supported by any case laws. I also appreciate for your concern in giving proper and right advise. Well in this case how does the querist going to get benefit?
I do not mind someone correcting my views on any topic presented by me. That way all are benefited.
A V Vishal
(Expert) 03 May 2010
Is vague, unfounded and intuition harsh words ?
And exactly I am saying the same, there need not be a case law for a simple established fact of law which a professional can only understand. Further I did not present my views since Mr Vineet & Mr Amit had already answered your debateable part.
mahendrakumar
(Querist) 03 May 2010
well , Mr.Amit being a professional has also raised more or less similar doubts,in the forum.
In the abscence of a valid receipt from the lic for having received the premium during 2009-10,(Lic cannot and will not issue a receipt for 2009-10 for the premium received on 07th apr 2010 just because dd is dated 31st march 2010)how does the party claim for the relief? unless, you answers this, how the queriest is going to benefit.
A V Vishal
(Expert) 03 May 2010
A valid receipt for 2009-10 is sufficient even though the receipt may be dated after 31-3-2010 (LIC will treat the payment for the year 2009-10 but not 2010-11), in all fairness the querist had taken a DD with an intention to pay LIC on 31-03-2010, had he no intention he would have cancelled the DD and made the payment on a later date since he had passed the due date. However, the point would had been debateable if he had issued a cheque but he opted for a DD which can be purchased only against payment of cash. Hence he has paid for the liability on 31-03-2010 hence eligible for deduction during the year 2009-10.
mahendrakumar
(Querist) 04 May 2010
how is going to prove his claim before the assessing officer with a receipt dated 07 apr 2010?
I am leaving the discussion here for other experts as i am still not convinced.
