502up 2018-2025 Form

No, you can’t file ITR for AY:2017–18 & 2018–19 as the due date for filing ITR is over i.e 31st March 2019.But you can apply for condonation of delay in filing ITR with reasons to CIT. Once the condonation is accepted you can file but it is a complex process.For specific clarifications / legal advice feel free to write to dsssvtax[at]gmail or call/WhatsApp: 9052535440.

PPF contribution and LIC premium paid is shown under section 80C deductions ( chapter VIA deduction) in ITR.However total limit under 80C is 1.5L.( I am assuming that you have referred to investments made -ppf/LIC and not withdrawals (income)from the same).Regards.

For disability a deduction of ₹75,000/- is available u/s 80U.Rebate u/s87AFor AY 17–18, rebate was ₹5,000/- or income tax which ever is lower for person with income less than ₹5,00,000/-For AY 18–19, rebate is ₹2,500/- or income tax whichever is lower for person with income less than 3,50,000/-So, for an income of 2.8 lakhs, taxable income after deduction u/s 80U will remain ₹2,05,000/- which is below the slab rate and hence will not be taxable for any of the above said AY.For ITR,If doctor is practicing himself i.e. He has a professional income than ITR 4 should be filedIf doctor is getting any salary than ITR 1 should be filed.:)

As per Section 115BB of the Income tax Act, 1961 any income of winnings from any lottery or crossword puzzle or race including horse race or card game and other game of any sort or from gambling or betting of any form or nature whatsoever (which includes income from poker) is taxable at 30% plus education cess of 3% (Total 30.9%). There is not benefit of basic exemption limit but Chapter VIA deductions are available i.e. section 80C, 80 D and other seciton 80- deductions. TDS is also deductible at 30%.

The premise of the question is faulty. The question asks “how much of a tax cut will the top 1% need to get us out of a recession later this year or early in 2019?Clearly, since we are not in a recession right now, the assumption is that the tax cuts recently enacted by the Trump administration will cause a recession in a few months or so. That is probably a good prediction. Reagan’s tax cuts for billionaires caused a recessionary economy. So did GW Bush’s tax cut swindle. There is no reason to presume that the most recent incarnation of Trickle Down economic voodoo will not have the same results that every previous tax cut policy has had. The US will almost certainly fall into a recession. The only question really is “when will it happen”, and “how deep will it be?”The fallacy of the question is in the assumption that once the economy goes into a recession thanks to tax cuts for billionaires, that more tax cuts for the richest billionaires will be the way to remedy the situation. You cannot enact tax cuts, that then go on to cause a recession, and then fix the recession with more of the policy that caused it in the first place.While there are no doubt many people who have been exposed for so long to Republican Trickle Down economic voodoo that they actually believe tax cuts will be good for the economy, the fact is that you don’t fix a problem by increasing the policies that caused the problem in the first place.The real world doesn’t work that way.

Taxes can be viewed as having 4 uses (or purposes) in our (and most) governments:Revenue generation (to pay for public services).Fiscal policy control (e.g., If the government wishes to reduce the money supply in order to reduce the risk of inflation, they can raise interest rates, sell fewer bonds, burn money, or raise taxes. In the last case, this represents excess tax revenue over the actual spending needs of the government).Wealth re-distribution. One argument for this is that the earnings of a country can be perceived as belonging to all of its citizens since the we all have a stake in the resources of the country (natural resources, and intangibles such as culture, good citizenship, civic duties). Without some tax policy complexity, the free market alone does not re-distribute wealth according to this "shared" resources concept. However, this steps into the boundary of Purpose # 4...A way to implement Social Policy (and similar government mandated policies, such as environmental policy, health policy, savings and debt policy, etc.). As Government spending can be use to implement policies (e.g., spending money on public health care, environmental cleanup, education, etc.), it is equivalent to provide tax breaks (income deductions or tax credits) for the private sector to act in certain ways -- e.g., spend money on R&D, pay for their own education or health care, avoid spending money on polluting cars by having a higher sales tax on these cars or offering a credit for trade-ins [ref: Cash for Clunkers]).Uses # 1 & 2 are rather straight-forward, and do not require a complex tax code to implement. Flat income and/or consumption (sales) taxes can easily be manipulated up or down overall for these top 2 uses. Furthermore, there is clarity when these uses are invoked. For spending, we publish a budget. For fiscal policy manipulation, the official economic agency (The Fed) publishes their outlook and agenda.Use # 3 is controversial because there is no Constitutional definition for the appropriate level of wealth re-distribution, and the very concept of wealth re-distribution is considered by some to be inappropriate and unconstitutional. Thus, the goal of wealth re-distribution is pretty much hidden in with the actions and policies of Use #4 (social policy manipulation).Use # 4, however, is where the complexity enters the Taxation system. Policy implementation through taxation (or through spending) occurs via legislation. Legislation (law making) is inherently complex and subject to gross manipulation by special interests during formation and amendments. Legislation is subject to interpretation, is prone to errors (leading to loopholes) and both unintentional or intentional (criminal / fraudulent) avoidance.The record keeping and forms referred to in the question are partially due to the basic formula for calculating taxes (i.e., percentage of income, cost of property, amount of purchase for a sales tax, ...). However, it is the complexity (and associated opportunities for exploitation) of taxation legislation for Use # 4 (Social Policy implementation) that naturally leads to complexity in the reporting requirements for the tax system.