Tianjin (China), July 15: Highlighting the dastardly April 22 terrorist attack in Pahalgam, External Affairs Minister (EAM) S. Jaishankar on Tuesday said that it is imperative that the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) should remain true to its founding objectives of tackling terrorism, separatism and extremism and take an uncompromising position on the challenge.

“The three evils that SCO was founded to combat were terrorism, separatism and extremism. Not surprisingly, they often occur together. Recently, we in India witnessed a graphic example in the terrorist attack in Pahalgam on 22 April 2025. It was deliberately conducted to undermine the tourism economy of Jammu and Kashmir, while sowing a religious divide,” said EAM Jaishankar while addressing the gathering – which also included Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar – at the SCO Council of Foreign Ministers Meeting in China’s Tianjin.

“The UN Security Council, of which some of us are currently members, issued a statement that condemned it in the strongest terms and ‘underlined the need to hold perpetrators, organisers, financiers and sponsors of this reprehensible act of terrorism accountable and bring them to justice’. We have since done exactly that and will continue doing so. It is imperative that the SCO, to remain true to its founding objectives, take an uncompromising position on this challenge,” he added.

In his address, EAM Jaishankar spotlighted that the meeting is taking place at a time of “considerable disorder” in the international system.

“In the last few years, we have seen more conflicts, competition and coercion. Economic instability is also visibly on the rise. The challenge before us is to stabilize the global order, de-risk various dimensions and through it all, address longstanding challenges that threaten our collective interests,” he said.

India, he mentioned, has taken several initiatives in the SCO in domains ranging from startup and innovation to traditional medicine and digital public infrastructure.

“We will continue to positively approach new ideas and proposals that are genuinely for our collective good. It is essential that such cooperation is based on mutual respect, sovereign equality and in accordance with territorial integrity and sovereignty of member states,” the EAM stated.

To deepen collaboration within the SCO, EAM Jaishankar reckoned that there should be more trade, investment and exchanges.

“For that to move to the next level, it is imperative that we address some current issues. One of them is the lack of assured transit within the SCO space. Its absence undermines the seriousness of advocating cooperation in economic areas. Another is to ensure the promotion of the International North South Transport Corridor (INSTC). We are confident that it will continue to gather momentum,” he said.

India, which has always expressed its readiness to respond to the urgent developmental needs of the Afghan people, also continued to bat for the need for development activities in the war-torn region.

“Afghanistan has been long on the SCO agenda. The compulsions of regional stability are buttressed by our longstanding concern for the well-being of the Afghan people. The international community, particularly SCO members, must therefore step up with development assistance. India, for its part, will certainly do so,” remarked EAM Jaishankar.

Having highlighted in the past that the contours of multipolarity are more visible now than ever before, the External Affairs Minister underlined the importance of cooperation and coordination amongst countries of the region.

“The world is today moving towards greater multi-polarity. This is not just in terms of redistribution of national capacities, but also the emergence of effective groupings like SCO. Our ability to contribute to the shaping of world affairs will naturally depend on how well we come together on a shared agenda. That means taking everybody on board,” he concluded.

Srinagar, July 15: The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has announced an extension of the Income Tax Return (ITR) filing deadline to ensure a smoother and more convenient experience for taxpayers. According to Section 234A of the Income Tax Act, individuals who file their ITR and pay any outstanding self-assessment tax by the new deadline will not be liable to pay interest.
This extension applies to a wide range of taxpayers, including both salaried individuals and the self-employed. It’s important to note that the due dates for filing vary depending on the taxpayer category, as defined under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
For individuals, Hindu Undivided Families (HUFs), Associations of Persons (AOPs), and Bodies of Individuals (BOIs) whose accounts are not subject to audit, the new deadline has been extended to September 15, 2025. This revised timeline gives taxpayers additional time to ensure accuracy and compliance in their returns.
• For businesses that require an audit, the deadline remains October 31, 2025.
• For businesses requiring transfer pricing reports (in case of international/specified domestic transactions), the due date is November 30, 2025.
In case of revised return or belated returns, the due date is December 31, 2025.

Why has due date been extended?

With the introduction of the new tax regime in the ITR forms this year, the board decided to give an extension, as these changes took time to be implemented in the income tax filing system. Both the offline and online ITR utilities required time to update those changes.

What Happens If You Miss the ITR Filing Deadline?

If you miss the due date for filing your Income Tax Return (ITR), you still have an opportunity to file an updated return under Section 139(8A) of the Income Tax Act. Previously, this was allowed within 24 months, but now taxpayers have up to 48 months from the end of the relevant assessment year to file. However, filing late comes at a cost—additional tax of 60% to 70% on the due amount may apply, depending on when the updated return is filed.

Penalties and Interest
Under Section 234A, if you delay filing your ITR, you will be charged interest at 1% per month or part of a month on any unpaid tax until the return is filed. The longer the delay, the more interest you’ll owe—so it’s advisable to file as early as possible to avoid penalties and extra charges.

Srinagar, July 15: A video that has gone viral shows fellow passengers asking the troublemakers to sit down. “You cannot stop a plane like this; this is illegal,” one of the passengers says. “AC chala de, hum baith jayenge” (switch the AC on, we will sit down),” comes the reply from the rear part of the cabin. Some passengers are then heard telling the cabin crew to call CISF security personnel and deboard the troublemakers. “Those who don’t want to go, make sure they get down,” says a flier.

A SpiceJet flight from Delhi to Mumbai experienced significant disruption on July 14 after two unruly passengers attempted to forcefully approach the cockpit during taxiing. According to air traffic tracker Flightradar24, flight SG 9282, originally scheduled for departure at 12:30 pm, eventually took off at 7:21 pm and landed in Mumbai at 9:05 pm. It remains unclear whether the nearly seven-hour delay was directly caused by the incident.

In an official statement, SpiceJet confirmed that the passengers ignored repeated instructions from the cabin crew, fellow travelers, and the captain to return to their seats. Prioritizing the safety of everyone on board, the captain chose to return the aircraft to the bay, where the individuals were removed from the flight. They were later handed over to the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) for further action.

New Delhi, Jul 15: The Supreme Court on Monday declined to order the premature release of Ghulam Mohammad Bhat, a convict in a triple murder case allegedly linked to a terrorist act.

A bench comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and SVN Bhatti, however, allowed Bhat to challenge the remission policy of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir by filing an application in another pending case.

The bench heard Bhat’s plea for early release on the ground that he had served 27 years in prison.

While senior advocate Colin Gonsalves appeared for Bhat, additional solicitor general K M Nataraj represented the union territory.

Bhat allegedly entered the residence of an Army informer and opened fire with an AK-47 rifle, killing three persons.

Explosive devices, including a Under Barrerl Grenade Launcher grenade, were also reportedly recovered from the scene, the prosecution alleged.

Nataraj submitted killing civilians for allegedly providing information to the Army amounted to a terrorist act and therefore Bhat was disentitled from availing benefits of premature release.

“The act was intended to create fear and deter cooperation with lawful authorities. This goes beyond a simple murder,” he said.

Agreeing with the contention, the bench said “If the act was committed to create fear, to ensure that no one dares to side with the law, then it certainly carries the characteristics of a terrorist act.”

The top court continued, “Even if TADA was not invoked during trial, that doesn’t automatically disentitle the court from assessing the true nature of the offence for the purposes of remission.”

Gonsalves, however, argued Bhat was convicted only under Section 302 IPC (murder) and the Arms Act, and not under any anti-terror legislation TADA.

“Nothing was proved in court to attract the provisions of TADA. The trial court or the high court never found it to be a terrorist act,” he said, citing precedents of similarly-situated convicts who were granted premature release.

The bench remained unconvinced and added, “We tentatively agree that the act appears aimed at sending a message that those who cooperate with authorities will face lethal consequences. We cannot turn a blind eye to such implications.”

When the counsel for Bhat referred to other premature release cases, the bench noted the absence of a comparable remission policy.

“We don’t have the remission policy before us. Without it, how can we draw analogies?” it asked.

Gonsalves then sought liberty to challenge the J&K remission policy within the ongoing proceedings.

The bench allowed him to file an interim plea in a pending matter challenging the same policy.