Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Economy & business fact checks

Explore claims publishers have checked about economy & business. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.

7,093 published reviews in this topic

FACTLYEconomy & business

18% GST is applicable on education in India

Publisher’s rating: MISLEADING

FACTLY’s review concerns a social-media video claiming that 18% GST applies to education in India. It says it checked GST rates on the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) website and distinguishes education services provided by qualifying educational institutions from private coaching. The review describes qualifying institutions as those providing preschool and school-level education, education within a curriculum leading to a qualification recognized by law, or an approved vocational course. It says regular and vocational educational institutions’ services are exempt, while private coaching does not qualify for that exemption when it does not lead to a recognized qualification. [S1]

FACTLYEconomy & business

Old 500-rupee currency notes having the same serial number but with the signatures of two different RBI governors indicates a scam by the UPA government.

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns a comparison of two old Rs. 500 notes with the same serial number but signatures of different RBI governors. The post presented that pairing as evidence of a scam under the UPA government. FACTLY’s review checked whether the serial-number and signature combination itself supported that allegation, rather than treating the similarity as proof of fraud. The decisive evidence in the review is an RBI FAQ answering whether two or more banknotes can have the same serial number. RBI’s answer, as quoted by FACTLY, is that this is possible, and that the notes may be distinguished by a different inset letter, year of printing, or signature of a different RBI governor. The review explains that an inset letter is printed on a note’s number panel. Thus, different governors’ signatures are among the distinguishing features RBI says can occur on notes with matching serial numbers; that fact alone does not establish a scam. The review also cites RBI’s 2009 announcement of Rs. 500 notes bearing the signature of then-governor D. Subbarao, with an ‘E’ inset letter, and its statement that Rs. 500 notes issued from 2000 would remain legal tender. It adds that notes bearing former governor Subbarao’s signature surfaced after Raghuram Rajan took over in 2014, and that RBI said those notes were legal tender while the signature-change process was underway. This provides a documented explanation for the appearance of notes associated with different governors, distinct from the post’s allegation of a UPA scam.