Raise your TDS grievances before the Standing Committee

CA Vimal Punmiya, who is member of the Committee, has promised to raise the grievances and suggestions from taxpayers on TDS during the meeting on 22nd July

In a proactive initiative, Chartered Account (CA) Vimal Punmiya, a member of the Standing Committee on tax deducted at source (TDS) is seeking people's feedback, suggestions and grievances that he has promised to raise during the Committee meeting on 22 July 2014.


TDS has been a pain in the neck for all middle class assesses and despite repeated representations, the government has not agreed to do away with the TDS, particularly in respect of bank deposits. As per the amendment to the Finance Act, senior citizens were not required to pay any advance tax before the close of the year, but need to pay appropriate tax, if liable, before filing the tax return. But this was only a half-hearted measure, as the government had not waived TDS even for senior citizens even though they are not required to pay advance tax, thereby putting them into great inconvenience. Moreover, the I-T department has been most reluctant to reimburse the TDS, claims several senior citizens.


Last month, even the Tax Administrative Reforms Commission (TARC) in its first report has addressed grievances faced by the tax payers in claiming credit for TDS. The TARC has suggested introduction of a passbook scheme for TDS, albeit with built in safeguards. It also suggested a new initiative, that would enable a taxpayer to make corrections in the TDS statement filed by the deductor like a bank or an employer.


If you have any issues with your TDS deductions, then you can send details at [email protected] , which Moneylife Foundation will forward to Mr Punmiya to take up during the meeting.


The Committee, appointed by Commissioner of Income Tax, is meeting with a view to make the administration of TDS more effective, transparent, fair and tax payer friendly.



sivaraman anant narayan

3 years ago

My take on this issue is as follows:
1. The Govt is authorised by law to collect taxes from its citizens, as may be approved by parliament.
2.Rule making is a process of delegated legislation to allow facilitation of this process of tax collection.
3.By a process of empowerment the Govt sub-delegates this function of tax collection to certain third party agencies like banks, employers etc.
4.The relationship between Govt. and these agencies should be as between Principal and Agent.
5. As far as citizens are concerned, when these agencies recover TDS from their entitlements, it is as good as Govt. having collected its taxes and the citizens are absolved of paying taxes, to the extent collected by these agencies.
6. The recourse Govt. has against these agencies is as between Principal and Agent and Govt cannot penalise the citizens for what its agents do not do as per its empowerment.
7.The agents are duty bound to account to the citizens what it has recovered from them and such account(and to that extent) should be legally a discharge of obligation by the citizen.
8.Rules of empowerment should provide a recourse to citizens against the Govt./Agents if they do not give account of their actions to the concerned citizens.
In my view Income-tax rules which are violative of the above are null and void and are justiciable. The Committee should recommend amendment of rules to reflect above proposition to safeguard rights of citizens.


3 years ago

Today when IT return is filed online why IT Dept is not crediting online to my bank account when refund is below Rs 100/-. Even if refund is Rs 10- or anything below Rs 100/- IT Dept should remit the refund online. Actually i ensure i remit a tax amount of more than Rs 10 to 100 than my due so that i can collect a refund and this way i know my return is settled.


3 years ago

i know a case where a PAN Card holder is unable to get an item of Income Tax recovered and remitted by a PSB which is having U status. The remitting back having outsourced the return filing job is unable to set right the issue. IT Department is sending notice to tax payer demanding dues where AS26 is showing PSB has recovered tax and remitted. IT officer is not able to get it set right. So the return of PAN holder is not cleared. Why does Assesing officer expect the tax payer to visit him. Why he cannot use official mail to correspond with tax payer so that tax payer can bring the Tax remitter PSB into picture so that Tax recoverer and IT Dept can sort out the muddle. IT Dept is not able to guide as to how to set right this muddle.

RBI signs MoU with Hong Kong Monetary Authority

RBI signed an MoU for supervisory cooperation and exchange of supervisory information with the Hong Kong Monetary Authority

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Monetary Authority of Hong Kong for exchange of supervisory information.


“The RBI on Thursday signed an MoU for supervisory cooperation and exchange of supervisory information with the Monetary Authority, Hong Kong,” the central bank said in a release.


The MoU was signed by Arthur Yuen, deputy chief executive for banking, at the Monetary Authority, Hong Kong and Harun R Khan, deputy governor of RBI.


The signing ceremony was held at the Monetary Authority office in Hong Kong.


RBI has been signing the MoU and Letters for Supervisory Cooperation with supervisors of other countries to promote greater co-operation, including sharing of information about the supervised entities among the national authorities.


With this, the central bank has signed MoUs with 21 supervisors for supervisory co-operation.


Who advised Cuomo on mortgage industry investigation? A mortgage lobbyist!

Howard Glaser was brought on to help then-Attorney General Andrew Cuomo on his mortgage industry investigation. Glaser was working for the industry at the same time.

A version of this story was co-published with the Albany Times-Union.

In early 2007, when he was New York State attorney general, Andrew Cuomo brought on a longtime confidant as a consultant on mortgage industry investigations, a move that has gone undisclosed until now.

The friend was Howard Glaser and he had another job at the same time: consultant and lobbyist for the very industry Cuomo was investigating.

Glaser, who went on to become a top state official in Cuomo's gubernatorial administration, was operating a lucrative consulting firm, the Glaser Group, with a host of mortgage industry clients.

Later that year, Glaser provided insights on Cuomo's investigations to industry players on a conference call hosted by an investment bank.

Cuomo's office ended up giving immunity to one of Glaser's clients a year into his term as attorney general.

In the end, experts say, the mortgage investigations Cuomo touted as "wide-ranging" came to little, even as he held one of the country's most powerful prosecutorial positions through the financial crisis and its aftermath.


Early 2007: Cuomo launches ·    "wide-ranging" investigations of the mortgage industry. The attorney general's office brings on Howard Glaser — a former Cuomo aide who at the same time works as a consultant and lobbyist for the industry — to help on the mortgage investigations. The role is not disclosed.

November 2007: Glaser ·    comments at length on Cuomo investigations on an analyst conference call hosted by the investment bank Keefe, Bruyette & Woods.

January 2008: Cuomo makes a deal with a Glaser client, Clayton Holdings, providing immunity for prosecution in exchange for information.

Glaser's role in the attorney general's investigations was disclosed to ProPublica in response to a public records request. The extent of his work is unclear, as is how long it lasted. Glaser told ProPublica the scope of the work was limited. While it was a formal arrangement, it was unpaid.

Cuomo's office referred questions to Steven Cohen, who was chief of staff when Cuomo was attorney general. "There is no doubt Glaser provided advice to the governor when he was attorney general," said Cohen. "The role he served was as a general consultant on the industry overall. He did not provide advice on specific investigations."

Glaser also said that, despite the investment bank conference call, he never advised clients on Cuomo investigations.

One person who worked in the mortgage industry during that time said Glaser had a reputation as having Cuomo's ear.

"If you needed to get to Cuomo, Glaser was the guy to go to," the person said.

Before becoming a lobbyist for the mortgage industry, Glaser worked in the late 1990s under Cuomo at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, where he was known as Cuomo's "right-hand man" and "hammer."

Glaser declined to release a list of his clients from the period he worked for the attorney general.

A 2008 bio said his clients included "mortgage insurance companies, real estate and housing trade associations, mortgage bankers, and investment research companies."

Glaser's dual role when Cuomo was attorney general "poses a serious conflict of interest," said Craig Holman of Public Citizen.

At least two of Cuomo's early investigations involved firms that Glaser acknowledged to ProPublica were his clients. The client that was granted immunity in return for cooperation was the mortgage due diligence firm Clayton Holdings.

Clayton ended up being at the center of the mortgage fiasco. The Connecticut firm worked for banks such as JP Morgan and Merrill Lynch, examining whether the mortgage loans the banks were buying from lending institutions (such as Countrywide) met the lenders' standards for credit worthiness. The banks would package those loans into securities that were then sold to investors.

Cuomo subpoenaed Clayton in mid-2007 before coming to a deal in January 2008 in which he granted the firm immunity from civil and criminal prosecution in exchange for information about its dealings with the banks.

It's not clear whether Cuomo used the information he got from Clayton, though it did come up in a case brought by Cuomo's successor. Clayton data showing how the banks bought, packaged and sold off bad loans was considered key to understanding the complex deals that led to the crisis.

Clayton has never been charged with any wrongdoing. But some reporting has shed light on the firm's relationship with the big banks.

Clayton workers interviewed by two veteran business reporters for the book Chain of Blame reportedly said they were under pressure "to pass as many loans as possible."

In the book, Clayton workers recall quotas of one loan per hour, higher-ups changing negative determinations, and "that they were told by their supervisors at Clayton never to use a certain word — 'fraud.'"

Noting that Cuomo had the power to subpoena Clayton for documents without granting immunity, Erik Gerding, a law professor and author of Law, Bubbles, and Financial Regulation, raised questions about the deal.

"The first question is, why do they need immunity? The second question is, what did the prosecutors get that they otherwise wouldn't have gotten without immunity?" Gerding asked.

Clayton declined to comment.

When the New York Times broke the news of Cuomo's immunity deal with Clayton, Glaser was quoted in the story — though the piece did not mention Glaser's work for either Clayton or Cuomo.

Glaser said Clayton had separate counsel in its dealings with the attorney general's office. Further, Glaser said the attorney general's office "never talked about those specific cases with me."

He added that he was brought in to the attorney general's office at the beginning of Cuomo's tenure because he had warned of problems in the industry.

Glaser provided a copy of a March 2007 email to top Cuomo aides in which he outlined ideas for the attorney general's office "to obtain relief and a good public policy outcome on several fronts."

The attorney general's office denied our request for other Glaser emails, citing an exemption in the state's freedom of information law.

A second Cuomo case involving Glaser clients was the attorney general's attempts to reform appraisal standards via deals with mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

(Politico reported in 2008 that Glaser was appearing on TV commenting favorably on the government's efforts to prop up Fannie and Freddie without revealing his work for the faltering companies.)

Glaser said Fannie and Freddie had separate representation with the attorney general's office in that investigation.

Another curiosity about Glaser's role is that he was a frequent commentator on Cuomo's investigations, both to the press and to industry players. He was usually identified as simply a mortgage industry consultant or occasionally as a lobbyist.

While Glaser denies having advised clients about Cuomo's investigations, he did just that with industry players. In a November 2007 conference call hosted by the investment bank Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, Glaser held forth about Cuomo's investigation of inflated appraisals of homes, according to an account in American Banker.

American Banker reported that Glaser "said it is doubtful the attorney general is seeking 'record-breaking fines' or to subject lenders to the pain of loan repurchases 'unless…the industry does not respond to his desire to implement prospective change.'"

Glaser said he was not compensated for "a few" analyst calls he did for Keefe, Bruyette & Woods.

His firm, the Glaser Group, described itself as "the unparalleled leader in Washington for government affairs strategies and analysis specializing in the financial services and mortgage finance arena."

In early March 2007, during the period he was working for Cuomo's office, Glaser registered as a lobbyist for a client, a large cooperative of mortgage banks called Lenders One. In an unusual filing more than two years later, he said the lobbying had ended the same day it started.

Glaser said he never "did anything material" for Lenders One as a registered lobbyist.
Glaser also said he never worked for the ratings agencies, who were key players in the run-up to the financial crisis and got immunity in a deal with Cuomo that critics later questioned.

It's not uncommon for outside consultants to be brought into complex investigations, according to James Tierney, director of the National State Attorneys General Program at Columbia Law School.

"The key is full transparency," he said, both from the consultant to the prosecutors and from the prosecutors to the public.

"Who are your other clients? And how much are you getting paid by them?" are among the questions prosecutors should ask any consultant, said Tierney, who was previously the attorney general of Maine.

Gerding, the law professor who wrote a book on financial crises, recently studied the crisis-era record of state attorneys general and came away surprised by how few cases Cuomo brought.

"It is pretty striking if you look at all the press releases how few of them really deal with the financial products that were at the heart of the crisis," Gerding said.

Cuomo nevertheless won his bid for the governor's office partly by claiming a tough record of going after Wall Street and corporate greed.

After his stint advising the attorney general's office, Glaser went on to help on Cuomo's gubernatorial campaign, with a focus on defending Cuomo's HUD record on mortgage issues.

Glaser then joined the Cuomo administration in the powerful role of director of state operations. He left that post last month to become an executive at OTG Management, an airport development company that lobbies New York officials.

In emailed statements and a series of tweets as we were reporting this story, Glaser criticized ProPublica and it founding chairman and largest funder, Herbert Sandler.

Last month, Glaser said in an email:

Ironically, Herb Sandler, the founder of ProPublica, was a pioneer in the exotic lending business, although the controls he put in place as a portfolio lender were discarded by other players as these products morphed their way into the secondary/investor market; nonetheless ProPublica is built on the fruits of the exotic mortgage market through the fortune Herb made at Golden West and World Savings

This month, he emailed:

In 2006, when propublica's billionaire subprime founder was denying any problems in the mortgage industry, and continuing to flood the mortgage market with abusive loans, I was warning of the devastating impacts of these toxic loan products and calling for stricter regulation. As Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo held financial institutions accountable, returned billions to investors, and forced lenders to adopt sweeping reforms. Propublica was built on the backs of subprime mortgage victims - while the Attorney General and I worked on ending the kind of abusive lending that Propublica continues to benefit from today. I'm happy to compare that record anytime.

Asked to respond to Glaser's comments, Sandler noted that he has no information on the story: "It's an absolute policy at ProPublica that directors and funders do not have any information about any story on which journalists are working."

Glaser's statements are "a transparent attempt to deflect attention from the story on him. I have no relevancy to it," Sandler said. "If anybody is interested in any of the background on this, there is a website that speaks to some of the things he's talking about."



We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.

To continue

Sign Up or Sign In


To continue

Sign Up or Sign In



The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)