QUIZ – 2017: Insights Current Affairs Quiz, 08 DECEMBER 2017

Solution: b.

Should maintenance money paid by parents for the welfare of their minor child be exempted from income tax? The plea taken in the case before the High Court in Payal Mehta v. Sanjay Sarin (2016) was that the interest on the amount of maintenance money deposited in the name of a minor child by the parent should not be subjected to tax, that is, such income should not be clubbed with the income of either of the parent for the purpose of imposing tax.

Section 64 (1A), as it stands now, includes that “in computing the total income of any individual, there shall be included all such income as arises or accrues to his minor child…”

The purpose of the tax provision in the Act is to plug-in loopholes to prevent the avoidance of tax, causing substantial loss or leakage of revenue. However, the High Court insisted that such an exemption (refer above) should be created.

The Law Commission, in its 265th Report titled ‘Prospects of Exempting Income Arising Out Of The Maintenance Money of Minor’, shot down the High Court’s suggestion.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/on-taxing-maintenance-money/article21291877.ece;

—

Solution: d.

In an increasingly economically interdependent world, the importance of an improved legal framework for the facilitation of international trade and investment is widely acknowledged. The (UNCITRAL), established by the UNGA in 1966, plays an important role in developing that framework in pursuance of its mandate to further the progressive harmonisation and modernisation of the law of international trade by preparing and promoting the use and adoption of legislative and non-legislative instruments in a number of key areas of commercial law. Those areas include dispute resolution, international contract practices, transport, insolvency, electronic commerce, international payments, secured transactions, procurement and sale of goods.

In the years since its establishment, UNCITRAL has been recognised as the core legal body of the United Nations system in the field of international trade law.

The Commission is composed of 60 member States elected by the General Assembly. Membership is structured so as to be representative of the world’s various geographic regions and its principal economic and legal systems. India is a member at present (will be until 2022).

No need to be read (we are just providing the source): http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/general/12-57491-Guide-to-UNCITRAL-e.pdf;

Improvisation: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/nissan-motor-moves-arbitral-tribunal/article21291928.ece;

http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/about/origin.html;

Solution: c.

The judges of a high court are appointed by the President. The chief justice is appointed by the President after consultation with the chief justice of India and the governor of the state concerned. For appointment of other judges, the chief justice of the concerned high court is also consulted.  In  case  of  a  common  high  court  for  two  or  more  states,  the  governors  of  all  the  states concerned are consulted by the president.

In the Second Judges case (1993), the Supreme Court ruled that no appointment of a judge of the high court can be made, unless it is in conformity with the opinion of the chief justice of India. In the Third Judges case (1998), the Supreme Court opined that in case of the appointment of high court judges, the chief justice of India should consult a collegium of two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. Thus, the sole opinion of the chief justice of India alone does not constitute the ‘consultation’ process.

Indian Polity by M Laxmikanth;

Improvisation: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/hc-view-on-performance-of-judges-will-prevail-collegium/article21291885.ece;

Solution: b.

Fundamental Rights prevent the establishment of an authoritarian and despotic rule in the country, and protect the liberties and freedoms of the people against their invasion by the State. Most of the Fundamental Rights are available against the arbitrary action of the State, with a few exceptions like those  against  the  State’s  action  and  against  the  action  of  private  individuals. When  the  rights that are available against the State’s action only are violated by the private individuals, there are no constitutional remedies but only ordinary legal remedies.

Article 13 declares that all laws that are inconsistent with or in derogation of any of the fundamental rights shall be void. In other words, it expressively provides for the doctrine of judicial review. This power  has  been  conferred  on  the  Supreme  Court  (Article  32)  and  the  high  courts  (Article  226)  that can  declare  a  law  unconstitutional  and  invalid  on  the  ground  of  contravention  of  any  of  the Fundamental Rights.

Further,  Article  13  declares  that  a  constitutional  amendment  is  not  a  law  and  hence  cannot  be challenged.  However,  the  Supreme  Court  held  in  the Kesavananda  Bharati case2  (1973)  that  a Constitutional  amendment  can  be  challenged  on  the  ground  that  it  violates  a  fundamental  right  that forms a part of the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution and hence, can be declared as void.

Indian Polity by M Laxmikanth;

Improvisation: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a-woman-does-not-mortgage-herself-to-a-man-with-marriage-cji/article21290270.ece;

—

Solution: a.

America’s decision to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel could be viewed as illegal as the Israeli claim that Jerusalem “complete and united” is its capital has been declared “null and void” by UNSC Resolution 478, which also asks member-countries to “withdraw diplomatic missions from the Holy City”.

This resolution was adopted by 14 votes to none, with 1 abstention (USA).

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/DDE590C6FF232007852560DF0065FDDB;

Improvisation: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/capital-crisis/article21291937.ece;

—

Solution: b.

Any question regarding disqualification arising out of defection is to be decided by the presiding officer of the House. Originally, the act provided that the decision of the presiding officer is final and cannot be questioned in any court. However, in Kihoto Hollohan case (1993), the Supreme Court declared this provision as unconstitutional on the ground that it seeks to take away the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the high courts. It held that the presiding officer, while deciding a question under the Tenth Schedule, function as a tribunal. Hence, his decision like that of any other tribunal, is subject to judicial review on the grounds of mala fides, perversity, etc. But, the court rejected the contention that the vesting of adjudicatory powers in the presiding  officer is by itself invalid on the ground of political bias.

Improvisation: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/defection-disaffection/article21293419.ece;

—

Solution: b.

The presiding officer of a house is empowered to make rules to give effect to the provisions of the Tenth Schedule.

The law has come to be criticised on the following grounds:

• It does not make a differentiation between dissent and defection. It curbs the legislator ’s right to dissent and freedom of conscience.
• Its distinction between individual defection and group defection is irrational.
• It does not provide for the expulsion of a legislator from his party for his activities outside the legislature.
• Its discrimination between an independent member and a nominated member is illogical. If the former joins a party, he is disqualified while the latter is allowed to do the same.
• Its vesting  of  decision-making  authority  in  the  presiding  officer  is  criticised  on  two  Firstly, he may not exercise this authority in an impartial and objective manner due to political exigencies.  Secondly,  he  lacks  the  legal  knowledge  and  experience  to  adjudicate  upon  the cases.

Indian Polity by M Laxmikanth;

Improvisation: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/defection-disaffection/article21293419.ece;

—