On 19 September 2017, Law Ministry approved Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017. It will allow FIU, the premier technical snoop wing under the Finance Ministry, to file an application for declaration of fugitive economic offender. What does ‘I� ?->(Show Answer!)

1. On 19 September 2017, Law Ministry approved Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017. It will allow FIU, the premier technical snoop wing under the Finance Ministry, to file an application for declaration of fugitive economic offender. What does ‘I’ stand for in ‘FIU’?

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->What does the PMKSY, the social welfare scheme recently approved by the union cabinet, stand for?....

QA->Fugitive former Thailand Prime minister who was appointed as economic advisor to the Cambodian government, in a move that adds to tensions between the countries?....

QA->Israel"s Cabinet on November 23, 2014 approved a contentious bill that officially defines Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. Which is that bill?....

QA->Accordingto Finance Minister Arun Jaitley Rs. ____ crore in black or untaxed money hasbeen disclosed under the centre’s Income Declaration Scheme.....

QA->Symbolic representation of folder,file or application are called:....

MCQ->On 19 September 2017, Law Ministry approved Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017. It will allow FIU, the premier technical snoop wing under the Finance Ministry, to file an application for declaration of fugitive economic offender. What does ‘I’ stand for in ‘FIU’?....

MCQ->On 19 September 2017, Law Ministry approved Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017. The Bill entrusts the responsibility to try cases of Fugitive Economic Offenders under ______.....

MCQ->On 19 September 2017, Law Ministry approved Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill,2017. The proposed bill will be applicable in cases where the value of offences is over ______.....

MCQ-> Study the following information carefully and answer the questions given below: Following are the conditions for selecting Manager- Finance in an organisation: The candidate must — (i) be a graduate in any discipline with at least 50 percent marks. (ii) be a postgraduate in Management with specialisation in Finance. (iii) be at least 25 years and not more than 35 years as on 1.2.2013. (iv) have post qualification work experience of at least two years in the Accounts/Finance department of an organization (v) have secured at least 40 percent marks in the selection process. In the case of a candidate who satisfies all other criteria EXCEPT (A) at (ii) above, but has worked as Deputy Manager - Finance in an organization for at least three years, his/her case is to be referred to General Manager- Finance. (B) at (v) above, but has secured at least 70 percent marks in post graduation, his/her case is to be referred to President-Finance.In each question below, detailed information of one candidate is provided. You have to take one of the following courses of action based on the information provided and the conditions and subconditions given above and mark your answer accordingly. You are not to assume anything other than the information provided in case of each candidate. All these cases are given to you as on 1.2.2013Mark answer a: if the candidate is not to be selected. Mark answer b: if the data Provided are not adequate to take a decision. Mark answer c: if the case is to be referred to General Manager-Finance. Mark answer d: if the case is to be referred to President-Finance. Mark answer e: if the candidate is to be selected.Geeta Kothari was born on 10th September 1980. She has been working in the Finance Department of an organization for the past four years after completing her MBA with Finance specialisation. She has secured 50 percent marks in the selection process.
....

MCQ-> Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given. Certain words/phrases have been given in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions. From a technical and economic perspective, many assessments have highlighted the presence of cost-effective opportunities to reduce energy use in buildings. However several bodies note the significance of multiple barriers that prevent the take-up of energy efficiency measures in buildings. These include lack of awareness and concern, limited access to reliable information from trusted sources, fear about risk, disruption and other ‘transaction costs’ concerns about up-front costs and inadequate access to suitably priced finance, a lack of confidence in suppliers and technologies and the presence of split incentives between landlords and tenants. The widespread presence of these barriers led experts to predict thatwithout a concerted push from policy, two-thirds of the economically viable potential to improve energy efficiency will remain unexploited by 2035. These barriers are albatross around the neck that represent a classic market failure and a basis for governmental intervention. While these measurements focus on the technical, financial or economic barriers preventing the take-up of energy efficiency options in buildings, others emphasise the significance of the often deeply embedded social practices that shape energy use in buildings. These analyses focus not on the preferences and rationalities that might shape individual behaviours, but on the ‘entangled’ cultural practices, norms, values and routines that underpin domestic energy use. Focusing on the practice-related aspects of consumption generates very different conceptual framings and policy prescriptions than those that emerge from more traditional or mainstream perspectives. But the underlying case for government intervention to help to promote retrofit and the diffusion of more energy efficient particles is still apparent, even though the forms of intervention advocated are often very different to those that emerge from a more technical or economic perspective. Based on the recognition of the multiple barriers to change and the social, economic and environmental benefits that could be realised if they were overcome, government support for retrofit (renovating existing infrastructure to make it more energy efficient) has been widespread. Retrofit programmes have been supported and adopted in diverse forms in many setting and their ability to recruit householders and then to impact their energy use has been discussed quite extensively. Frequently, these discussions have criticised the extent to which retrofit schemes rely on incentives and the provision of new technologies to change behaviour whilst ignoring the many other factors that might limit either participation in the schemes or their impact on the behaviours and prac-tices that shape domestic energy use. These factors are obviously central to the success of retrofit schemes, but evaluations of different schemes have found that despite these they can still have significant impacts. Few experts that the best estimate of the gap between the technical potential and the actual in-situ performance of energy efficiency measures is 50%, with 35% coming from performance gaps and 15% coming from ‘comfort taking’ or direct rebound effects. They further suggest that the direct rebound effect of energy efficiency measures related to household heating is Ilkley to be less than 30% while rebound effects for various domestic energy efficiency measures vary from 5 to 15% and arise mostly from indirect effects (i.e., where savings from energy efficiency lead to increased demand for goods and services). Other analyses also note that the gap between technical potential and actual performance is likely to vary by measure, with the range extending from 0% for measures such as solar water heating to 50% for measures such as improved heating controls. And others note that levels of comfort taking are likely to vary according to the levels of consumption and fuel poverty in the sample of homes where insulation is installed, with the range extending from 30% when considering homes across all income groups to around 60% when considering only lower income homes. The scale of these gapsis significant because it materially affects the impacts of retrofit schemes and expectations and perceptions of these impacts go on to influence levels of political, financial and public support for these schemes. The literature on retrofit highlights the presence of multiple barriers to change and the need for government support, if these are to be overcome. Although much has been written on the extent to which different forms of support enable the wider take-up of domestic energy efficiency measures, behaviours and practices, various areas of contestation remain and there is still an absence of robust ex-post evidence on the extent to which these schemes actually do lead to the social, economic and environmental benefits that are widely claimed.Which of the following is most nearly the OPPOSITE in meaning to the word ‘CONCERTED’ as used in the passage ?
....