Wednesday, February 03, 2021

Severe Punishment to the Decision Makers of IRCTC and Indian Railways

I donated Rs.1000 to Lord Krishna to give severe punishment to the decision makers of IRCTC and Indian Railways.

What I would prefer is, all of them should go to hell very soon and get all the punishments mentioned in the Garuda Puranam. But, I would let Lord Krishna decide appropriate punishment for them.

My accounts are blocked by IRCTC. 

When I raised the request, their reply was, I was hitting enormously and using auto-fill scripts.

I replied to them saying, in the last 9 months, I hardly used IRCTC accounts and no need to talk about hitting enormously or using auto-fill scripts. 

Then, they replied saying, my account is used for commercial purposes. 

I replied saying that I never booked even a single ticket in the last 9 months. When there is not even a single booking, what do they mean by using it for commercial purposes.

When I complained in RailMadAd, initially, they gave the same reason as the account was used for commercial purposes. After I refuted that, they gave the reason that my profile had junk values and I needed to submit my id card. 

I know that my profile does not have any junk values. Still, I submitted my id card. 

They closed the ticket saying, IRCTC is going to resolve it, and IRCTC did not resolve it. 

Their explanation was like, they wanted to block my account and inventing reasons to block it rather than checking whether they blocked with a valid reason or not. 

Even if I had done what they claimed that I did, if it was a private organization [without government support], they would have handled it a lot differently. 

For the issue with hitting enormously, one can have a limit of the no.of requests for a duration, and once the user reaches that limit, they will not be able to make any requests till that duration.

IRCTC is the only organization in the whole world, which says, "Auto-Fill scripts" is a software and used for hacking. 

When the organization does not want people to use it for commercial purposes, they limit the no.of bookings they make. IRCTC is already limiting the no.of bookings to 6/month. With 6 tickets per month, what commercial activities can one person do? Before Corona, I used to travel more than 10 times in a month, and when even 10 tickets were not enough for me, they put the limit of 6 tickets and even in that, they are saying, I am using it for commercial purposes.

If the profile has junk values, a typical private organization will force to fix the profile before proceeding. But, IRCTC just disables the account with no way to fix it.

I very rarely ask God to punish someone. Most of the time, I just leave them and wish Karma to take care of them. But, after a very long time, I am explicitly praying to God to punish someone. 

I wish all the decision makers of IRCTC and Indian Railways are severely punished in hell very soon for harassing me. I prefer them to get all the punishments that are mentioned in Garuda Puranam. But, I let Lord Krishna decide what to do with them.

Saturday, January 09, 2021

Politicians - Converting Black Money to White Money

If you are paying tax and if you know any politician who wants to convert black money to white money for his/her political party, by helping them, you can reduce your tax burden.

You can take the cash from the politician (upto 10% of your gross salary), and transfer the equivalent money to that political party's account as a donation. With that donation, you can claim 100% tax deduction. That money is going to be white money for the political party. 

I used to wonder why people are donating to a few corrupted parties. Later I realized that it is very easy for the politicians to find people who are looking for tax exemption, and with their help they can get white money as a donation to their political party. 

Saturday, January 02, 2021

SEBI - Flexi Cap with old definition of Multi Cap

Few months back, I wrote criticizing SEBI for restricting Multi Cap Mutual Funds.

Recently, SEBI introduced new type of Mutual Fund, "Flexi Cap". The definition of "Flexi Cap" is same as old "Multi Cap".

They could have left the Multi Cap as it is, and created a new fund with the present definition of Multi Cap.

Instead they changed the definition of Multi Cap, and (after the industry cried over it) they created a Flexi Cap with the old definition of Multi Cap.

Thursday, December 31, 2020

Fixed Deposits - Worst Investments for Long Term

 First time, I helped a person in filing a return who paid more income tax due to "income from other sources" than "income from salary" [Of course, by taking "income from other sources" to the top bracket].

The culprit is Fixed deposits.

That person is using FDs to save all her money and there is a significant amount in the Fixed Deposits. She does not need the money anytime soon and she put FDs with cumulative interest and automatic renewal.

One needs to pay the income tax on the entire interest that is realized every financial year. Even if one does not take the interest from the FD, even if the FD is not closed/renewed in that financial year, still the tax has to be paid, because the bank is adding the interest to the FD and it is income for you. You need to pay tax on the interest at the top bracket.

If you are having significant money in the bank, you would be forced to pay a lot of tax.

FDs are the worst possible investments especially for long term. One should use FDs only to keep money for emergencies or to use in the next few months.

For short term investment, I recommend Liquid Mutual Funds (or even Debt MF). With Liquid (or Debt) Mutual Funds, one needs to pay the tax only at the time of withdrawal. If we withdraw after 3 years, the profit is adjusted with the inflation, and the tax would be even less.

For long term investment (6 years or more), I recommend either Equity Mutual Funds or Land.

Monday, December 07, 2020

Freedom in Agriculture

If I am doing a transaction with a person/organization, and if anyone is trying to stop that by any unfair means, I consider the people/organizations who are trying to stop that transaction as criminals. However they have full freedom to convince the person/organization transacting with me, to not transact with me. They have full right even to offer bribes to the other person. But, they do not have any right to threaten them to not transact with me. Those whoever threatening or stopping the transaction by any other way are criminals in my point of view (irrespective of whether the law of the land says it or not).

If I am a farmer and if I can find someone who is ready to purchase my produce for a mutually agreeable price, and if anyone tries to stop that transaction by unfair means, they are criminals in my point of view. 

Fair means to stop the transaction means, atleast one party should be better off by cancelling the transaction [Other party can be worse off]. Unfair means, neither party would be better off by cancelling the transaction. 

Few examples of the fair means to stop the transactions are,

Offering higher price to me, so that I can sell the produce to you rather than the other person.

Offering lesser price to the other person, so that they would buy the produce from you rather than from me. 

Giving some additional goodies to either of them, like free transport, free loading/unloading or anything that is typically done before or after the purchase.

Few states legislated that, the sell price must not be less than the minimum support price. If anyone buys for lesser price, they would be imprisoned. 

If the Government is ready to buy from everyone for minimum support price, then why do they need to legislate that? Why will someone sell for a lesser price, when the government buys from the farmers at a higher price? That legislation will only be (mis)used to blackmail few vendors, and never required for ethical reasons. 

If the Government is not going to buy from everyone, and if vendors are not ready to buy at government set price because of lack of market, what would happen? If one has to follow the legislation, then the farmers have to burn all their produce because no one was willing to buy that. For the ignorant people, there are many farmers, who burnt their farm without plucking anything from that (for different reasons).

If they are given the option to sell for a lesser price, atleast they would get some amount rather than zero. 

Even when the government is ready to buy from everyone for Minimum Support Price, still, few farmers may sell for a lesser price to few vendors for other reasons. The cost of plucking, transport to the nearest market etc., are significant in the cost to the farmer. If the vendor is ready to take care of all those, then it makes sense to the farmer to sell it to that vendor for a lesser price rather than seemingly higher Minimum Support Price.

Each individual knows what is best for them. It is a crime to interfere in others' matters. The maximum thing that one can do is, convincing the seemingly losing party.