Transportation Planning And Transit Service Consulting Services: Fill & Download for Free

The answers so far seem to presuppose that the system will be extensive (widespread service) and involve rail or other fixed-guideway technology. My experience is that 10 years to plan and construct such a system in any place other than a totalitarian state (government "very eager" and public consultation not needed) is grossly optimistic. More likely, 20 to 30 years. On the other hand, a public transport system can mean buses (including small ones, even vans) on existing roads. If there are no regulatory barriers to providing service and demand is sufficient to supprt it, an initial line can be started in a matter of weeks. Car pools and jitney services should be considered examples of public transport system elements, as should bus-rapid-transit service. (Think about cities in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.)

Although I have not specialised in transportation engineering, some of the ideas are as follows:Design of Multimodal integrated transportation servicesIntelligent traffic management and real time traffic analysis softwareDevelopment of Smart transit systemsUse of recycled materials in pavement constructionReview and restructuring plan of old and outdated transportation planningCase studies of various efficient designs for patterns of road systems, fly overs and tunnelsCase studies of various new engineering materials of pavement designCase study of environmental assessment of transportation servicesAnalysis of Public private partnerships in transportation projects and social impact assessmentApplications of modern survey techniques like GIS, GPS, Remote sensing for better precision and speed in laying out geometric alignment of highway elements like horizontal and vertical curves, etc.Apart from these there may be other good topics which can be found through literature study and consultation of experienced professionals working in academics, research and field experts.

India’s GST has become a classic example of the famous Hindi saying, “Chaubey ji gaye the Chabbe ji ban ne; par Dubey ji ban kar laute!” which is a wordplay about how a person started off trying to become much better, but ended up becoming worse off than what they started with!GST, during it’s planning phase, was in a good shape. But, it’s form and implementation have been a big mess for trade and industry. And sure, you might say that initial hiccups are to be expected in any major reform of such a scale (which is what the government is saying to defend itself[1]), but it isn’t that simple. And I am going to tell you why.The first discussion paper on GST (released in 2009)[2] had talked about two GST rates only, and it was backed with good reason. Economists have always been of the view that multiple rates are likely to complicate stuff. Even the comments of Department of Revenue (in 2010)[3] had talked about the problems with multiple rates and too many exemptions in GST.There should be a single rate of SGST both for goods and services. A two rate structure for goods would pose the following problems:a) Likelihood of inversions in duty structure with raw materials and intermediates being at a higher rate and finished goods being at a lower rate, especially as the intention is to apply the lower rate to necessities.b) Inversions would result in input credit accumulation and demand for refunding the same from time to time.c) The general rate (RNR) would have to be higher than under a single rate structure.d) Currently, services are chargeable to tax at a single rate. Adopting a dual rate for goods would generate a similar demand for services too.e) Having different rates for goods and services would imply that the distinction between goods and services should continue.However, nobody listened.And we ended up with not two, but five GST rates, and an exemption list which is far, far bigger than what was originally suggested by experts.Of course it was going to be complicated!That’s not all. Experts had also strongly opposed the removal of petroleum from under GST, saying that it would only lead to credit blockage and increased inefficiency.Keeping crude petroleum and natural gas out of the GST net would imply that the credit on capital goods and input services going into exploration and extraction would not be available resulting in cascading.Leaving diesel, ATF and motor spirit out of the purview of GST would make it extremely difficult for refineries to apportion the credit on capital goods, input services and inputs.These products are principal inputs for many services such as aviation, road transport, railways, cab operators etc. As such, these may be levied to GST and in select cases credit of GST paid on these items may be disallowed in order to minimize the possibility of misuse.Did that happen? No sir, it didn’t!And about compliance.It’s no secret that when GST was started, there was a pandemonium everywhere for the first few months - so much that compliance took a huge time for businesses. I know that for a change so big, it takes time to ensure that everybody is on board.But, in case of GST, there was a delay from the government’s side. A lot of features were not even started on the portal until after the GST had already been implemented, confusing a lot of businessmen. So, saying that “every change takes time” does not cut it, because if you are initiating a change in an organisation, then you need to be prepared yourself before expecting others to be on board. In fact, thanks to tax consultants and support from a lot of government officers, things were relatively smooth for businesses but it was the government’s ill-preparedness that caused all the chaos.You cannot just shrug it off as bad planning and move on, because, businesses incurred a cost for it, which was easily avoidable. For example, transitional credit that was admissible was not allowed - leading to working capital blocking and interest cost. The portal was not allowing to file returns, leading to a lot of late fee and interest being paid by businesses - not to mention the harassment it caused to many people.The problem with India’s GST is that it has become a boiling pot for the exact same problems that it started out to solve. For example:The distinction between goods and services continues - because many rules are different for goods and services. Hence, that confusion still persists and might lead to litigation.Classification disputes - which had hitherto been silenced since the rate of excise was broadly the same for all goods - are now propping up again because there are multiple rates and regardless of what the government wants, the tax departments are going to issue a lot of show cause notices to taxpayers just to irritate them.Anti-profiteering is a Pandora's Box of confusion and litigation. In fact, it appears noble on paper, but in reality it is going to be a headache for many people to comply with.Ask any tax expert, and he would tell you that there have been thousands of cases at the Supreme Court level about classification - so you can imagine how many would arise at the lower levels. It’s just a confusion in the waiting.So, yes, India’s GST is quite complex. However, I still maintain that it is better than the tax system what we had earlier, if that is any kind of relief. But, if you ask me, it is not as great as it could have been.Footnotes[1] People may have initial hiccups post GST rollout: Jaitley[2] http://www.cbec.gov.in/resources//htdocs-cbec/gst/1st-discn-paper-new.pdf[3] http://www.cbec.gov.in/resources//htdocs-cbec/gst/comments-DoR-1st-discn-paper-01012010-new.pdf