Shivaji Sarkar
It is reassuring to know that Finance Minister Arun Jaitley intends ending tax terrorism and does not believe in retrospective tax. Appending a lollipop: If the economy improves he could give more concessions. Possibly in his next Budget, which would have his signature, be free from limitation imposed by the interim Budget and give direction of Modi’s Government.
However, the budgetary papers suggest bureaucrats are trying to usurp more powers and are virtually working contrary to political wisdom. The memorandum explaining the Finance Bill’s provisions has the devil popping up. It suggests new unnecessary amendments. These will only add to the convoluted process and procedures followed by IT (income tax) authorities and complicate lives of people, leading to needless harassment.
Invariably, the Minister’s promises are often jettisoned by officials who form a maze of rules with an obvious purpose. For instance, one of Jaitley’s predecessor’s had allowed interest waiver on home loans of up to Rs 1.5 lakh. But many who had taken that waiver after they got their house or flat allotments were being made to run from pillar to post, in some cases for 15 years, by IT authorities for having availed it.
The IT asks people silly questions, why they should be allowed concession? Why penalty should not be levied on them for having committed the “crime”? Consequently, a small flat owner is forced to spend bulky sums on lawyers and chartered accountants for following rules set by the Government. This time too, the Finance Minister’s announcement of an increase in home-loan waiver to Rs 2 lakh would certainly lead to more harassment.
It does not end here. The IT department to show their “robust” functioning made the Government deduct tax at source (TDS) on small interest earnings on bank deposits. This resulted in deducting taxes on small fixed deposits of women, senior citizens and other weaker sections. Why? They did not fill up Form 15.
Questionably, do the tax authorities think that poor people or a bank depositor has enormous time to fill up these silly forms?  The procedure has led to thousands of crore of deductions, which the IT department is not entitled.
Further, the recovery rules also cost people hefty sum in lawyers’ fees. So they prefer to bear the IT extortion. Alongside, the Government needs to consider why bank deposits should be taxed. People have already paid tax prior to putting money in banks.
Besides, it is simple wisdom that if one levy’s TDS on bank deposits, it leads to a large number of people moving away from the banking sector which in turn creates an illusory “black money syndrome”.
Notably, Jaitley announced encouraging financial inclusion. But this move makes many small and big businessmen shy away from the banking sector. As a first move to help the economy, the Government must remove TDS from bank deposits and end not only the tyranny, illegal deductions but also bring real white money into the financial system. The loss to the exchequer is minimal as banks and the IT department would also save crores spent on unnecessary paper work.
But despite Jaitley’s wishes to simplify the system, the Finance Bill proposes to amend Section 133A of the IT Act so that income tax authorities could enter any office or a place where a business or profession is carried out for the purpose of “verifying” what has been deducted or collected at source. Worse, they can impound any document without any approval.
Also, under Section 133C a notice can be issued to any person to verify information. This comes into effect on 1 October this year.
Furthermore, under the Wealth Tax Act provisions the valuation officer would have all powers. The Customs Section 129E too is being substituted with a new section to prescribe a mandatory fixed pre-deposit of 7.5 per cent of duty at first stage and 10 per cent at second state, demanded or penalty imposed or both for filing of appeal with the appellate or tribunal. The amount payable has a ceiling of Rs 10 crore.
Similar changes are being made in the Excise Act as well. Plainly, the entire approach seems to be a legacy of the colonial era, where every Indian or corporate was looked at with suspicion. This will only create problems for business and industry.
Undoubtedly, the Modi Government must change its mindset. As the concessions it has granted with a view of boosting various sectors are actually being denied. Given that by making laws more stringent or where it is not required, gives unnecessary powers to the bureaucracy. We all know how such powers are used and misused. Touts smoothen the system leading to rising corruption. The very thing the Modi Government is trying to prevent.
According to the BJP manifesto the suggestion to end tax terror is valid. But this needs a sharp eye to keep vigil on the “innocent” moves by the bureaucracy.
Recall, Jaitley in an interview asserted, “For future, I have given a large assurance that this Government does not believe in creating fresh liability of tax retrospectively. So, such an episode will not happen”. People believe him. But they want him to do more by clipping the extra wings of tax authorities.
Specially against the backdrop that during the past few years thanks to IT authorities being given such draconian discretionary powers, a number of tax officials were found having wealth disproportionate to their income!
In sum, simplification of rules, procedures and reduction of powers would be in the interest of the economy and peoples’ freedom. True, businesses might be corrupt but if such complicated laws are there it would only force them to fudge accounts. Better rules could save that money and help it being used in a productive manner. Also, freeing bank deposits of the tax net could add to inflow of money into the system.
Clearly, a tax-friendly society with simple forms and procedures, would add to growth. One hopes Jaitley will enunciate many of these reforms. People want a simple regime as a complex system adds only to inflation. A society which has suffered for many decades nestles many hopes. INFA

Shiban Khaibri
Could this also happen that an Indian journalist could dream to meet one of the most wanted perpetrators of crime against humanity viz; mastermind of 26/11  and talking to him in the hope to  get him along all the way from Pakistan and deposit him here before the concerned Police authorities? Could a slight change in the attitude of such a person   be brought about by talking to him or discussing with him any logic or reason? Could a journalist from this country after meeting Hafiz Sayeed motivate him to express regrets and surrender to justice for involvement in gruesome 26/11? If not, what motivated a senior journalist Dr. Ved Pratap Vaidik to meet Sayeed whose agenda is spreading hate, animosity and acrimony against this country and preach violence? What is more important is to know as to who arranged and facilitated this meeting and why?
What are this Track 2 or 3 dialogue processes and who is behind it with what motive? What is the composition of this group of journalists and “intellectuals”? In the same fashion, more or less some “peace lovers” were accepting the “warm” hospitality of Gulam Nabi Fai, an American citizen of Kashmiri origin to “discuss” so called peace in the subcontinent and the solution to the (created) problem of Kashmir? He was running some thing like Kashmiri American council. Could any peace be established due to such meetings, any development towards cementing friendship between the two countries or any withholding of the Kashmir rant by Pakistan, let alone end infiltration and terror activities in Kashmir? What subsequently happened to the KAC and how the “distinguished guests” to the intermittent meets started later distancing themselves from being branded as too close to Fai  are not faded  away from the memories of the people and that only shows  unnecessary importance given to and wasteful exercise undertaken to accord any legitimacy to such efforts albeit Track 2 or 3 missions. As per reports, flag ship of Track 2 dialogue was led by Congress leaders  Manishankar Aiyar and Salman Khursheed  and other participants were    journalist Dilip Padgaonkar, N. N. Jha,  Sanjeev Ahluwalia,  Barkha Dutt, Amit Baruah, S. Varadharajan, Anil Padmanabhan, Aakar Patel, S. Kulkarni, Dr.Zoya Hassan and Ved Pratap Vaidik. What did this bilateral dialogue seminar held in Islamabad last month achieve excepting issuing of statements to “India and Pakistan to fight two fights, one within and the other without, that of addressing the fear factor and uninterrupted and irreversible dialogue process…”  Flowery worded statements for just formalities lead to nowhere as after issuing of the statement, there have been twenty incidents in the state, that of border violations, firing unprovoked from Pakistan aimed at even  civilian targets and violent incidents in Kashmir engaging security forces. Could the group muster courage to urge Pakistan to ensure providing no support to terrorism aimed against this country let alone    winding up all terror camps? Tokenism and informal stances for peace and resolution of “fights” remain on paper based on what we have experienced right from 1947. That, however, does not mean that the two countries should not talk, discuss and resolve to usher in eras of lasting peace but sincerity from the other side has always been in utter deficit. That being a tragedy rendering Track dialogues and diplomacy redundant, hence a review of such moves is seriously required.
Can anyone from this Track club clarify the outcome of the conference at the Regional Peace Initiative and the quantum of success the delegation achieved during its four day session and stay in Islamabad and how far Pakistan, ISI and other power centers there underwent a transformation of heart and the mindset against this country at least partly if not wholly? What made Ved Pratap Vaidik stay back in Pakistan and whether it was included in the itinerary of their track schedule? Why did he, as per his claim, individually meet PM Nawaz Sharif and why not along with the other members forming the Indian delegation? It is the prerogative of a journalist to meet and interview personalities but to meet people like Sayeed by this journalist appears to be shrouded in mystery. Who facilitated his meet with him and why?
When even very aspiring people in Pakistan, as per reports, cannot have any access to Sayeed then how Vaidik could have one. It is believed that Sayeed was “controlled” by the Pakistan army and the ISI especially after the US and the World body declaring him as a global terrorist. In other words, more than the Government there, it is the military and the ISI which ensure safety and security of this man feigning grossly “involved” in charitable and philanthropist activities. Vaidik, when grilled on TV Channels back home was categorical in saying that some “journalist friends” in Pakistan organized the meet which brought notoriety fame to this hitherto not fairly known journalist in our country. Did he brag about his closeness to certain leaders in Delhi either in power or having close proximity to the ruling NDA and his “journalist friends” albeit ISI etc; wanted to exploit the same either to show that they were courting one believed to be close to the Government in Delhi or the move was to embarrass the Modi Government to send feelers that his Government too was like the Congress soft peddling with Pakistan? The matter does not end with the Government distancing itself far away from the journalistic tantrums of Vaidik in Pakistan or a statement in Parliament given by the External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj but a thorough probe into the whole gamut of this meet followed by telecasting of his interviews there and his narrative of what he said where and to whom. His meeting with Sayeed in the burst of so called journalistic inquisitiveness without recording the same as also the range of silly childish unprofessional questions asked has made him a queer egg both in the eyes of his fellow countrymen as well as in the journalistic fraternity. He must face the rigours of questioning from the concerned authorities so that a line is drawn where a journalist under the alibi of meeting any one and asking any thing and speaking anything does not become a convention and a precedent even if termed as diluting the “freedom of expression”. No action as yet appears to have been taken against him more so when his utterances there especially on Kashmir as reported by a Pakistani TV Channel are not only against the national interests but violates the tenets of territorial integrity and sovereignty of India. Talking on Kashmir and putting forth silly solutions by those who know nothing about Kashmir, its history and its real political landscape has become a habit   of  some self proclaimed intellectuals and  some journalists. Such intellectuals need be reined in to deter others from advocating solutions and resolutions of sensitive nature repugnant to the national interests. One Indian journalist, for example, has heaped ridicule and disrespect on the Father of the Nation by advocating institutions named after the Mahatma be rechristened. Likewise her stand on Kashmir too has been known to all but such writers survive behind the shield of “freedom of expression”.
The issue  of Vaidik meeting Sayeed in Pakistan was seen blown out of proportion on a few TV Channels which not only made him gain cheap publicity but the whole episode must have made us a laughing stock in the eyes of  other countries, at least 47 as one of the channels more frequently claims. Debates, discussions and sprees of “tough questions”   continued for days together in a spirit of competitiveness as if these channels were short of other important issues to deal with. A wordy duel between Vaidik and a TV journalist was watched on one of the channels which looked as “tuu tuu main main”, appearing as less of a debate and more of accusations and counter accusations. Clips of Baba Ram Dev with Vaidik and Baba with the PM Modi was projected perhaps as if it was sponsored by the Government or the journalist thought that a chance meeting with the PM made him a demagogue to try a suicidal journalistic adventure not approved of by the people more so by those who have suffered and those who continue to suffer in this country due to the mechanizations of Pakistan.

Chanchal Chauhan
The panacea for all of India’s perennial problems under Prime Minister Modi’s Government seems to be the mantra of ‘PPP’ (Private-Public-Participation). Notwithstanding, the Prime Minister’s promise of ‘achchhe din’ during electioneering, the ground reality underscores continuity of worse days. With the hike in rail fares, diesel, gas and essential commodities prices inflation is rising.
Notably, these ‘hard decisions’ taken within 50 days of Modi coming to power has made life of the poor more miserable than under UPA II. Worse, corporates are reaping profits out of the poor’s desolation as prices of onions, potatoes, tomatoes, vegetables and food items of daily consumption are skyrocketing, despite the Government’s assurances  of taking punitive action against hoarders, importing onions and raising its export price etc.
Alas, no visible change is seen in markets. Some leaders continue to ‘pass the buck’ to Manmohan Singh Government, as if he was hoarding stocks of onions, potatoes and other commodities in his New Delhi bungalow or constituency Assam!
Notably, the Government so far has done nothing new except to change the nomenclature of some components of the political system followed since Independence. The country adopted a mixed economy model, read PPP path wherein the private sector reaped benefits and capitalists like Dhirubhai Ambani, GD Birla, Tata’s turned into big ‘monopoly houses’ busy amassing huge wealth.
Pertinently, unknown to many former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi nationalised banking, insurance, steel, coal and other minerals primarily to ensure finance and raw materials supplies at cheaper rates to big monopoly houses, making our public sector subservient to the interests of private monopolies. Thus, capitalism grew rapidly and continues to do so.
Today, old and new monopolies have grown into big sharks and turned into large corporates, in essence, holding the reins of Government. All are in powerful positions and can even buy profit- making public sector ‘navratnas’.
Plainly, it is corporates pressure which impels our policy makers to ‘service’ their interests by hooting for disinvestment of public sector enterprises which were built with people’s money. Consequently, the PPP incantation is to oblige these big corporates along-with international finance capital who helped the BJP come to power.
Undeniably, this pressure manifests itself in all policies emanating from Raisina Hill. It was apparent in  The Railway and Finance Ministers Budget speeches, all in the name of ‘reforms’. Indeed, the change in Government is akin changing the CEO of a corporate whereby, industrialists pocket a big chunk of national wealth (minerals, oil, gas, land etc) as also earnings of the aam aadmi who are fed daily on assurances only.
The essence of the PPP is the continuation of the same economic policies of privatisation and liberalisation dictated by international finance capital which forces Governments of all developing countries to allow entry of foreign direct investment (FDI) in all sectors including railways, defence, banking and insurance. An analysis of Finance and Railway Ministers Budget speeches highlights this. In fact, the only difference between the present and earlier speeches was the absence of poetic quotes, no matter both were prosaic. Concentrating only on how to take care of corporate houses and assure them profits by allowing PPP in all sectors.
Arguably, in the coming days vested interests will also pressurise the Government to allow FDI in retail which the BJP is opposing. Will it somersault?  Remember, in a stagnant economy developing countries can only survive by extracting profits from the masses.
History shows that the right-wing Governments always proved to be the most suitable tool to fulfill corporates ambitions. The BJP with the Left which made a big hue and cry against the entry of FDI now seems to be following the erstwhile UPA route thereby serving the interests of foreign monopolies.
Significantly, the entry of FDI in insurance and banking is aimed to allow them to earn profits by investing nominal risk-free money to maintain an office given that these sectors do not require any raw material, big machinery and processing units which require a large work force. Also, these sectors are not going to generate any employment, just keep some skeleton staff and the rest agents will do all.
There is no gainsaying, the banking and insurance sectors pocket a huge amount of unclaimed deposits thereby increasing their wealth manifold. Nonetheless, FDI might be beneficial if big factories are set up and some useful wares are produced. This would generate jobs and become a tool of development.
However, foreign private capital is cunning not to take the risk of entering production activities as this is already stagnating world-over. They might enter the stock market, raise stocks prices, sell them and take their investment back with huge profits. Certainly, such investments do not benefit a developing country like India where job-seekers are increasing every day.
Clearly, the country needs schemes which generate more employment in rural and urban areas. Any investment, private or public should aim at production which involves human resources. Sadly, this is not happening as the public sector is still the largest employer of the work force. Think. If this sector is weakened in the name of PPP or disinvestment, joblessness would increase.
As all sectors now employ workers on a contract basis and pay poor wages insufficient to survive. These employees have no bargaining power as they are barred from forming any union, in total disregard of the Constitution and labour laws. Resulting in undue pressure to ‘reform’ labour laws so as to allow corporate houses in the process of entering PPP to exploit hired workforce akin to the slavery system. Should we still believe that PPP is really the cure-all for peoples’ perpetual problems?  INFA