'Draconian' amendment in Hindu Marriage Act gives wives final say in divorce cases; men's rights groups not amused

 'Draconian' amendment in Hindu Marriage Act gives wives final say in divorce cases; men's rights groups not amused

Pune: Upset over the latest amendments in the Hindu Marriage Act which virtually give wives a final say in divorce 

 

cases, Men’s Rights Association (MRA) on Saturday staged a protest against the legislation which they term as 'draconian'.

 

"The bill has a provision giving power to the courts to not grant a divorce unless the wife was paid adequate amount of 

 

money in the name of financial security of the woman. Such powers may result in harassment of men," MRA president Atit Rajpara said.

 

He also said the bill also provides special powers to wives to oppose the divorce if she was unhappy with the money she received from the husband under section IPC 498 (A), domestic violence act and several other maintenance laws.

 

According to the MRA, such clauses are outright anti-male and gender-biased and therefore men’s rights activists and organisations are opposing them. Rajpara said the mens’ rights organisations want the bill to be gender-neutral.

http://daily.bhaskar.com/article/MAH-PUN-draconian-amendment-in-hindu-marriage-act-giving-wives-a-final-say-in-divorce-ir-4306641-NOR.html?fb_action_ids=627117723973954&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map={%22627117723973954%22%3A167910723391944}&action_type_map={%22627117723973954%22%3A%22og.likes%22}&action_ref_map=[]

India’s 498a Law – The Abuse Continues

 India’s 498a Law – The Abuse Continues 

In a landmark decision in 2010, Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, the Supreme Court of India lambasted the prevalent abuse of the infamous Section 498a of the Indian Penal Code law demanded that the legislature should change the law and directed that a copy of its decision be sent to the Law Commission of Indian the hope that the legislation might be amended.

The Law Commission issued a report in August 2012, calling for quite modest changes in the law. However, even those changes have not yet been enacted.

In Gupta the Supreme Court demanded that lower courts intervene to prevent the rampant consequential abuse of process, which has “led to enormous social unrest affecting peace, harmony and happiness of the society”; ruled that “most” 498a cases are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations; asserted that many such cases are not bona fide, that many are filed with an oblique motive, and that many are filled with exaggerated or false claims; explained that these cases “can lead to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the accused and to his close relations” and “immense sufferings for all concerned;” and stated further that an ultimate acquittal may “not be able to wipe out the deep scars of suffering of ignominy.”

Meanwhile the abusive conduct continues. The Law Commission reported that in 2010 there were at least 340,555 cases under Section 498-A that were pending trial in various courts towards the end of 2010 and that there were as many as 938,809 people who were implicated in these cases. The reason that there were almost three times as many people accused as there were cases is that the law expressly authorizes a wife (but not a husband) to ask the police to bring charges against all of the relatives of her husband who may have participated in the alleged acts of cruelty.

We have commented previously on this law, that was well-intentioned in its enactment but which is frequently misused in India as a means of blackmailing non-resident Indian husbands. http://www.international-divorce.com/Indias-Notorious-Section-498A.htm.

http://www.internationalfamilylawfirm.com/2013/06/indias-498a-law-abuse-continues.html 

Lump sum payment received from Ex-husband against relinquishment of monthly maintenance not taxable: Tribunal

Lump sum payment received from Ex-husband against relinquishment of monthly maintenance not taxable: Tribunal

MUMBAI: Marriages are made in heaven, but a divorce happens on earth and with it comes the inevitable question of alimony and its tax implications. In a recent decision the Delhi Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that a lump sum payment received from a former husband, against relinquishment of monthly maintenance is a capital receipt and is not taxable.

The case relates to a Delhi-based woman, who had received a lump sum of $99,000 from her ex-husband based in the United States, but had not shown the amount in her tax declaration. Based on current exchange rate this sum translates to approximately Rs. 60 lakh.

Under Indian tax laws, any sum of money received by an individual without any consideration (without getting anything in return), in excess of Rs 50,000 in a year, is taxable. But if the same is received from a relative, such as a spouse, or on certain occasions such as marriage, it is exempt.

The tax officer, in this case, had held that as the divorce had taken place several years ago, the Delhi-based resident was not a 'relative' and hence such payment was not exempt but taxable as 'income from other sources' in her hands. This approach adopted by the tax officer, was rejected at the first level of appeal - commissioner of income-tax (appeals).

The commissioner held that the amount was paid by way of alimony only because they were husband and wife. Thus the payment received was from a relative (which includes spouse).

Further it cannot be said that the lump sum amount was received without any consideration. It was received against relinquishment by the wife of her right to receive monthly alimony payments (both past arrears and future payments). Such monthly payments were provided for in the divorce agreement.

Hearing an appeal filed by the tax officer, the Delhi ITAT upheld the order of the CIT (appeals). It observed that: "In this case, the taxpayer was to receive monthly alimony which was to be taxable in each year. As such monthly payments were not received they were not offered for tax as income. The lump sum received by the woman was a consideration for relinquishing all past and future claims." It was a non-taxable capital receipt not liable to tax, concluded the ITAT.

"Tax on alimony payment cannot be avoided by merely taking a lump sum consideration. Various facts such as the period of time the monthly alimony was not received, action taken for receipt of such alimony, and the fact pattern of the final settlement by way of lump sum payment will determine whether it will be treated as non-taxable," cautions a civil advocate, attached to the Mumbai high court.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Lump-sum-payment-received-from-Ex-husband-against-relinquishment-of-monthly-maintenance-not-taxable-Tribunal/articleshow/20823480.cms?