Kra Returns Form 2013: Fill & Download for Free

As per reports, a total of 28.7 million individuals filed income tax returns, of which 16.2 million did not pay any tax, leaving only about 12.5 million tax-paying individuals, which is just about 1 percent of the 1.23 billion population of India in the year 2013’It is insane to believe that 99% of Indian population is below tax paying category.Now, the question is ‘if farmer will/ should pay tax’.India is a democratic country and farmers comprise the largest vote bank and that too lesser educated. No political party can dare tax them.When you are in a democracy, mob decides…. Logic comes later. By saying this, i don’t mean i am against democracy, but certainly against stupidity.I am for equality for all in every sphere. Each and everyone should pay tax, No reservation for any one. Let each citizen get equal chance, wok hard, compete and contribute towards nation and self building.While i am for taxing each one at nominal rate, government needs to be accountable for any tax they collect, just like a private contractor/ service provider. We are paying to get a service. Minister should be a CEO. If he fails to deliver, does shoddy job, he could be fired, fined and jailed. His performance being judged every-year against KRA. I guess, i am dreaming…….All our leaders will leave politics by these standards.

Investments in Mutual Funds till recently were madealso only through distributors who are paid commission upfront and then regularly every year. The cost falls on investors. This is done mostly without the knowledge or against the wishes of investors. Recently in 2013 SEBI made a law that all the AMC (Asset Management Companies) will have to give the option of buying the units of every scheme Directly to investors. These plans are called Direct Plans while those through distributors are called Regular Plans. Because of saving on distributor expenses the returns on Direct Plans are always better than corresponding Regular Plans since investments are in the same stocks.For direct investment in Mutual Funds visit the website of the concerned AMC- Asset Management Company, like Birla Sun Life, DSP Blackrock, Franklin Templeton, Reliance Mutual Fund, Kotak Mutual Fund, Tata MF, L&T MF, Principal MF, ICICI MF, HDFC MF, SBI MF etc.How to invest in Mutual FundsBefore one can buy Mutual Funds one has to fulfill certain requirements relating to KYC ("Know Your Customer") norms. This entails verification of identity and address, financial status, occupation in-Person Verification (IPV) and such other personal information.What should the investor do?Investors can submit the common KYC Application Form along with all necessary documents as prescribed with any SEBI registered intermediaries including mutual funds. KRA shall send a letter to the investor within 10 working days confirming the details thereof.

Kind of strange question as the majority of Native Taiwanese (~99%+) looks clearly typically East Asian and or Southeast Asian (Austronesian) without any so called “pseudo-Caucasian” traits at all.Native Taiwanese are an Austronesian people and not related to us Ainu at all.They are genetically exclusively East Asian (southern East Asian to be precise).However there is a minor genetic component found in a very small number of the Atayal and Ami tribes, which is shared with one of the Jomon period populations of Honshu. It is suggested that this component arrived from a Paleolithic Central Asian migrant group during prehistoric times into Japan and through contact possibly to some Taiwanese, but all in all is rare in Native Taiwanese and also in modern Japanese.Southeast Asians and East Asians (among others) are very closely related and form one genetic cluster, known as East-Eurasian or East Asian-related.A study in 2020 by Prof. FU Qiaomei's team from the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology (IVPP) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences published in Science on May 14 found:“Present-day mainland East Asians from both the north and south share a closer genetic relationship to northern Neolithic East Asians along the Yellow River and to southern Neolithic East Asians on the southern coast of China. Further analyses show that the northern ancestry playing a larger role. Population movement, particularly from the north along the Yellow River southward was a prominent part of East Asian prehistory after the Neolithic. Interestingly, present-day Han Chinese in all provinces, north and south, show a similar amount of northern and southern influences.Southern East Asian-related ancestry, while less represented in mainland East Asia today, had extensive influence on other regions. Present-day Austronesian speakers, who share a close genetic relationship to present-day mainland East Asians but live across a wide swath of islands in Southeast Asia and the Southwest Pacific, show a remarkably close genetic relationship to Neolithic populations from the southern coast of China.Archaeological materials dating back to the Middle Neolithic have long hinted at the connection between Austronesian islanders and populations in mainland East Asia. Now, the genetic relationships uncovered by Prof. FU and her team show unambiguous evidence that Austronesian speakers today originated from a proto-Austronesian population that derived from southern China at least 8,400 year ago.”→ Native Taiwanese are ancestral to Austronesians, especially Filipinos.Liu et al. 2020 found that mostly all Southeast Asians are very closely related to East Asians and have nearly exclusive "East Asian-related" ancestry. Non-East Asian-related ancestry ranged between 1% to 11% with an average of 6% for the whole of Southeast Asia.The addition of PC2 further spreads out the East Asian cluster, with Siberia and Northern Asian groups at one end, and Insular Southeast Asia (ISEA) groups at the other.The study results also revealed that the endangered and isolated Negrito tribal minorities were not as isolated as suggested before. The Andamanese (samplified by the Onge) were found to have 55% Oceanic/African ancestry and 45% East/Southeast Asian ancestry. This means Austronesian/East Asian ancestry also reached very isolated tribes. This shows that so called “isolated people” were often less isolated than many think.Hallast et al. 2020 similarly speaks from an East/Southeast Asian cluster which encompasses the whole East Asia, Southeast Asia, Siberia, Central Asia and pockets of South Asia. According to Hallast et al. 2019, there were several migration events, starting from about 50,000–55,000 years ago from people belonging to the East/Southeast Asian cluster into other regions. See also: “Early replacement of West-Eurasian lineages from the East”.East/Southeast Asian groups, noteworthy the Turco-Mongols, Tibeto-Burmese, Austronesian, Austroasiatic and less but also Kra-Dai, had multiple impact onto modern Indian people and their ethnogenesis:Here the average “East-Eurasian” or simply East Asian (historically known as “Mongoloid race” but this term is now seen as controversial and is often replaced with “East-Eurasian”) ancestry based on autosomal DNA and full genome analysis:East-Eurasian (or simply East Asian-related/Mongoloid) is one of the three human genetic groups/clusters (per Yuan et al. 2019 and Chen 2020). Rowold et al. 2020 found that East-Eurasians (represented in the study by East and Southeast Asians) “were most distant to both West-Eurasians and Sub-Saharan Africans and formed a completely separate genetic cluster.”Genetic research indicates that populations related to modern East Asians existed as distinct genetic group already during early human times (see Tianyuan man) and likely much earlier (per Yuan et al. 2019 and Chen 2020). Significant geneflow from East Asia and eastern Siberia into parts of Europe were carried out through multiple migrations of East-Eurasian hunter gatherers and nomads.Now more about this Jomon period component:Genetic studies reveraled that the Jomon period population of Japan was heterogenous and did not consist of one single genetic ancestry pool. There were several migrations into Jomon period Japan, including a Paleolithic population from Central Asia which contributed the “Caucasoid like” look to some tribes.It should also be noted that during this time, the average population number was low and people were more mobile than in later times.At the same time, Austronesian speakers arrived from the south, pre-Ainuic speakers from the north, Tungusic speakers from the west, Japonic speakers from the west,… possibly also Amuric speakers through the Korean peninsula.According to Schmidt and Seguchi, the Ainu descended from the combination of the diverse Jomon period populations and cite unsuspected heterogenity among Jomon samples of ancient Japan:These results suggest a level of inter-regional heterogeneity not expected among Jomon groups. This observation is further substantiated by the studies of Kanzawa-Kiriyama et al. (2013) and Adachi et al. (2013). Kanzawa-Kiriyama et al. (2013) analysed craniometrics and extracted aDNA from museum samples that came from the Sanganji shell mound site in Fukushima Prefecture dated to the Final Jomon Period. They tested for regional differences and found the Tokoku Jomon (northern Honshu) were more similar to Hokkaido Jomon than to geographically adjacent Kanto Jomon (central Honshu).Adachi et al. (2013) described the craniometrics and aDNA sequence from a Jomon individual from Nagano (Yugora cave site) dated to the middle of the initial Jomon Period (7920–7795 cal BP). This individual carried ancestry, which is widely distributed among modern East Asians (Nohira et al. 2010; Umetsu et al. 2005) and resembled modern Northeast Asian comparison samples rather than geographical close Urawa Jomon sample.In this respect, the biological identity of the Jomon is heterogeneous, and it may be indicative of diverse peoples who possibly belonged to a common culture, known as the Jomon.Tests using phylogenetic relationship suggests that the Funadomari Jōmon have about 86% East Asian related ancestry and about 14% West Asian/European related ancestry. According to the authors, more data is needed to explain these results and possible consequences. This shows that the prehistoric population of Hokkaido was largely Northeast Asian and the Paleolithic Central Asian component (likely the cause of the West Asian/European ancestry found) was rather minor.The Ainu people formed from the combination of two distinct ancestry groups during the Jōmon period: One distinctive Paleolithic population, suggested to be from Central Asia (which had the “Caucasoid-like” look), and one population from Northeast Asia around the Sea of Okhotsk (related to various Northeast Asians and eastern Siberians, but also Native Americans, which had the “Mongoloid” look), with both arriving at different times during the Jōmon period in Japan.According to Lee and Hasegawa from the Waseda University, the Ainu-speakers itself originated from the Northeast Asian/Okhotsk population, which established themselves in northern Hokkaido and expanded into large parts of Honshu and the Kurils, long before the arrival of contemporary Japanese people. These Northeast Asian Ainuic-speakers later mixed with one of the Jomon period tribes of Honshu, known as Satsumon, which migrated into southern Hokkaido.The early expansion of proto-Ainu:The historical Ainu people formed through the combination of the Northeast Asian Okhotsk culture people and the Satsumon culture people which existed in southern Hokkaido and northeastern Honshu.The Satsumon culture itself formed throug the combination of Honshu Jomon with East Asian influences (likely from the Yayoi, but possibly also from Tungusic groups). The Satsumon migrated from Honshu into southern Hokkaido. Later, Ainu speakers migrated down from Hokkaido into northern Honshu.Thus, a number of Ainu had a “Caucasoid” like look, however do not wrongly think that all Ainu had such a look. The majority of Ainu did look Northeast Asian or Eurasian (mixed), as we formed from the combination of the Okhotsk and Satsumon. European scholars exaggarated the European like look of the Ainu for several reasons.As example, many historical Ainu did look Northeast Asian and or Native American:It is no suprise for me that the newest linguistic evidence found several links between Ainu and Native American languages.About the Jomon period allele found in the Atayal tribe of Taiwan:In 2016, a genetic study detected a low frequency of an allele in the Atayal (and Ami), which is associated with one of the Jomon period groups of Honshu. The authors concluded that this is evidence for contact between some tribes of Jomon period Japan with groups outside of Japan, specifically with certain Taiwanese Aboriginals.Atayal samples show a low frequency of alleles also found in Jomon period samples of Honshu.→ The evidence points to some minor contact between one or more Jomon period tribes with the Atayal tribe of Taiwan.A study by Jeong et al. 2016 found evidence for gene-flow between Jomon period groups of Japan and “lowland East Asian farmer populations” represented by the Ami and Atayal tribes of Taiwan. → Austronesian groups arrived in Japan and possibly mixed with locals and than some of their descedants returned to Taiwan forming a small convergence area. At the same time, Austronesian-like ancestry is found in Kyushu, Shikoku and Honshu at low frequency. The Hayato and Kumaso people are even suggested to have spoken an Austronesian language during the Yayoi expansion. They got assimilated into the Japanese and Ryukyuans.So the “pseudo-Caucasian” look (actually the picture cited in the question looks more of a mix) of some individuals of the Atayal tribe is because of gene-flow from the diverse Jomon period tribes of Japan. It is the same allele which also arrived into the Ainu through the Satsumon migration. However this allele has a very low frequency and is mostly absent from the Native Taiwanese. Actually it is even a minority in Ainu people and was not as common in Jomon period Japan as many think. The majority of Jomon period people did not loot Caucasian or European like. This was only one of many ancestral components found in Jomon period Japan. The majority, as proven by several genetic and anthropologic studies was related to modern East Asians and or a mix between all the groups which arrived there. There is evidence that several waves of East Asian groups established themself over previous groups, causing a steadly decrease of the Paleolithic Central Asian component, which finally nearly completely vanished after the Yayoi migration. (I.e. modern Japanese have about 3,3% ancestry from Jomon period populations and cluster with Korean and Han instead of any other group).Jomon period reconstructions:The reconstructions already showed that Jomon samples either looked East Asian or had “Eurasian” features (mixed features).They can at best be classified as “Eurasian” (i.e. mixed between Mongoloid types and Caucasoid types, as Brace et al. also concluded), however not as “Caucasoid”. → There was no lost white race in Japan which created the Japanese culture. Japanese culture came with the Yayoi people. Even the Jomon culture largely originated from one or more Northeast Asian migrations as concluded by a study published in the Cambridge University Press in 2020, which found that the Jōmon people were rather heterogeneous, and that there was also an “Altaic-like” pre-Yayoi population (close to modern Northeast Asians) in Jōmon period Japan, which established itself over the local hunter gatherers. This “Altaic-like” population migrated from Northeast Asia in about 6000BC, before the actual Yayoi migration. The authors additionally note that Austronesian peoples were possibly present in southernmost Japan (Sakishima) before the arrival of the Yayoi people.I cite the analyses of several Jomon period samples again to show that the Jomon period population was heterogenous and consisted of typical East Asians and various other groups, noteworthy the Paleolithic Central Asian group which contributed the Caucasian like phenotypes:These results suggest a level of inter-regional heterogeneity not expected among Jomon groups. This observation is further substantiated by the studies of Kanzawa-Kiriyama et al. (2013) and Adachi et al. (2013). Kanzawa-Kiriyama et al. (2013) analysed craniometrics and extracted aDNA from museum samples that came from the Sanganji shell mound site in Fukushima Prefecture dated to the Final Jomon Period. They tested for regional differences and found the Tokoku Jomon (northern Honshu) were more similar to Hokkaido Jomon than to geographically adjacent Kanto Jomon (central Honshu).Adachi et al. (2013) described the craniometrics and aDNA sequence from a Jomon individual from Nagano (Yugora cave site) dated to the middle of the initial Jomon Period (7920–7795 cal BP). This individual carried ancestry, which is widely distributed among modern East Asians (Nohira et al. 2010; Umetsu et al. 2005) and resembled modern Northeast Asian comparison samples rather than geographical close Urawa Jomon sample.In this respect, the biological identity of the Jomon is heterogeneous, and it may be indicative of diverse peoples who possibly belonged to a common culture, known as the Jomon.We can conclude that the majority of Jomon period people looked mostly East Asian too, but there was high variability among different tribes, with some tribes looking clearly non-East Asian.Some Atayal people seem to have got minor influence from these ancient groups. However note that even 99% of Atayal look East Asian/Southeast Asian. So the ultimate conclusion is that this is a individual topic and not a Native Taiwanese or Atayal topic.Even the cited persons picture seems cherrypicked. In another picture he looks mostly East Asian (also we do not know his exact ancestry):Now some examples of Native Taiwanese, the Austronesian people of Taiwan:Some historical pictures too:Conclusion:The question is already wrong. It are not some tribes, it are not even several people, but a small number of individuals which have simply mixed ancestry. Simple as that.Native Taiwanese generally look typically East Asian and or Southeast Asian. They are not related to us Ainu. Nor do we Ainu all look “Caucasian like” as many Europeans imagine. Some do, some not. Here a link to my answer about the Ainu people and our origin and history: Alexei Muraki's answer to Who are the Ainu?Thank you for reading. :)