Revised Income Tax Bill 2025: Key Changes And Why The Earlier Bill Was Withdrawn
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
22 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Hits and misses in the one nation, one election idea
Over the past decade, the Narendra Modi government has embraced a series of 'One Nation' policies aimed at replacing India's diverse patchwork of state-specific policies with uniform, national schemes. From the Goods and Services Tax ('One Nation, One Tax') to the portability of subsidised rations ('One Nation, One Ration Card'), the impulse has been toward centralisation and standardisation. Now, the government is pursuing one of the most controversial of these projects: One nation, one election. This proposal seeks to replace India's staggered electoral calendar with simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and all state assemblies. The idea has featured in Modi's speeches for years but was given a boost in March 2024, when a high-level committee headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind endorsed the idea. In December, the government introduced the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill to give the Election Commission of India (ECI) the authority to implement such a system. The Bill is currently being reviewed by a joint parliamentary committee. Modi and his BJP colleagues have long argued that frequent polls disrupt governance, drain resources, and induce short-term populism. India's current electoral calendar ensures that some part of the country is almost always in campaign mode. Proponents argue that constant elections constitute an undue burden on the State's coffers. And the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) — an informal set of norms to ensure a level-playing field during the campaign period — is cited as a source of 'policy paralysis'. There is obvious appeal to aligning India's staggered election calendar, but there are less disruptive, less dramatic solutions to the underlying problems the government wishes to solve. The case for simultaneity: The proposed Constitutional amendment would overhaul India's electoral framework. It introduces a one-time transitory provision to dissolve all state assemblies, so their elections coincide with the next Lok Sabha polls, thereafter locking both into a single five-year cycle. If a government — state or national — dissolves mid-term, fresh elections would be held only to complete the remainder of the original term. Supporters of this far-reaching reform advance three main arguments. First, simultaneous elections will yield savings in time, money, and bureaucratic resources. Political leaders and government machinery, freed from perpetual campaigning, could spend more time on governance. Voters, especially migrants and students, would require less travel. Proponents also point to reduced campaign costs and a lighter administrative burden. Second, fewer elections — they argue — would mean less voter fatigue and greater turnout. Third, they contend that aligned elections would enhance governance efficiency. With the MCC in force less frequently, governments could avoid frequent halts to new projects, and coordination between state and national administrations might improve, particularly if concurrent elections produced aligned political outcomes. The problems with one-size-fits-all: These arguments have merit, but each is weaker — or more complicated — than advertised. On time savings, the real issue is less about the electoral calendar than about campaign strategy. The BJP, like other parties before it, has deliberately 'nationalised' even the most local contests by deploying its top leaders in subnational campaigns. This is a political choice, not a structural necessity. Staggered elections need not mean the constant diversion of national leadership if parties invested in strong state-level leaders. In terms of costs, India's election administration is remarkably efficient given the scale of the exercise. The 2014 general election cost the central government around 0.03% of GDP. Even including state polls, the share over a five-year period is tiny compared to other budgetary items. If the problem is excessive campaign spending, the answer lies in genuine political finance reform. Instead, the government has gone in the opposite direction, creating opaque mechanisms for political giving such as the unconstitutional electoral bonds scheme. There are legitimate arguments to be made about the diversion of government officials and security forces to conduct, supervise, and secure elections on a staggered basis. But central paramilitary forces have doubled in size since the 1990s, easing concerns about overstretch. Simultaneous elections would require a larger, one-time deployment — creating its own risks. In terms of voter fatigue, the evidence from India is mixed. State election turnout has risen since the decline of simultaneous polls in the late 1960s, often exceeding turnout in national elections. And in states where assembly polls closely follow general elections, turnout has often increased (albeit by a smaller margin than in non-proximate elections). On government efficiency, the MCC is more limited than often claimed: It applies only to states holding elections, not nationwide (except during general elections), and does not halt ongoing programmes. Ironically, simultaneous elections could also result in more — not fewer — elections. According to the proposed amendment, if a government loses a vote of no-confidence and a fresh election is called, the newly elected government will only serve the remainder of the unexpired term. In that case, the efficiency argument for aligned polls no longer holds water. Risks to democracy and federalism: Beyond these weaknesses lie deeper concerns about democratic design. First, the essence of parliamentary government is that the executive is continuously accountable to the legislature and, by extension, the public. A shift toward a system resembling fixed terms upends this. Second, standardising state and national elections on a single cycle creates fewer opportunities for public participation and debate. The current staggered system of elections allows voters to act as a check on a dominant national party. Finally, the amendment gives the ECI broad discretion to delay polls with few limits and without specifying who governs in the interim. This opens the door to greater central control through President's Rule. A better way forward: India's current electoral calendar has costs, but there are less intrusive ways to address them. One option is to reform the MCC. The ECI could convene an all-party meeting to shorten the period it is in force or exempt certain categories of government action from its ambit. A second is to tackle opaque political finance. Parliament could align the ₹2,000 cash cap with the ₹20,000 disclosure threshold — or better yet, ban cash contributions altogether and require Aadhaar verification for all donations. A third is to streamline election scheduling. The 2024 general election stretched over 43 days — the longest voting period in seven decades. Reducing the number of phases would cut the MCC's duration and decrease disruption without changing the staggered nature of elections. If the government insists on consolidation, compromise models exist. One possibility is one nation, two elections, whereby state polls would be clustered at the mid-point of Parliament's term, reducing frequency while retaining separate state and national verdicts. Another option is aligning national and local body elections — saving costs without undermining the role of state assemblies. Proceed with caution: One nation, one election is a bold idea. But it risks centralising power, weakening federalism, and paradoxically increasing the frequency of elections. The better path is to fix the specific problems the proposal seeks to solve through targeted reforms that preserve the strengths of India's vibrant, multi-level democracy. These ideas — less flashy but more practical — have received little airtime in the current debate. They would be a promising place to start. Milan Vaishnav is senior fellow and director of the South Asia program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. This column draws on a new co-authored paper, with Caroline Mallory and Annabel Richter, 'Does 'One Nation, One Election' Make Sense for India?' The views expressed are personal.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
Disturbing rise in mob attacks on pretext of enforcing animal protection laws, says Qureshi community leader amid cattle trade strike
For over a month, Maharashtra's Qureshi community has been on strike, suspending all cattle trade across the state. Their protest, they say, is not against the law banning cow slaughter, but against rising harassment, vigilante attacks, and what they claim is targeted disruption of even lawful business activities. Mohammad Ali Qureshi, president of the Bombay Suburban Beef Dealers Association, speaks to Zeeshan Shaikh about the reasons behind the community's ongoing protest, the challenges they face, and what they expect from the government. Excerpts from an interview. Q. What are the main reasons for the community to protest? Mohammad Ali Qureshi: It has been a decade now since the Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment) Bill, 1995, was implemented in March 2015, which bans the slaughter and consumption of meat of cows, bulls, and bullocks in Maharashtra. This law severely impacted the functioning of the state's Qureshi community, which was involved in the beef trade. While the community has adhered to the new rules over the past few years, there has been a sustained campaign to run aground even lawful cattle trade and slaughterhouse operations. The law does not prohibit the sale or slaughter of water buffaloes, but even this is being targeted. A sustained campaign has been undertaken to bring down the business of the Qureshi community. That is why the community is protesting. Q. How is the beef trade going on in the state in spite of the law, and which specific government actions or policies do you believe are affecting your community's livelihood? Mohammad Ali Qureshi: When I say beef trade, I mean the sale and slaughter of water buffalo. This is completely legal as per the rules of the land. What is happening now is a disturbing rise in incidents involving harassment, violence, and mob attacks perpetrated by self-styled vigilante groups operating on the pretext of enforcing animal protection laws. They are targeting even the trade of water buffalo, which is legal. These groups operate under the aegis of Gau Raksha Samitis, which have proliferated quite a bit over the last few years. They unlawfully intercept vehicles ferrying cattle, snatch livestock, assault traders, and forcibly seize animals without any legal authority. In several regions, such actions have escalated to mob lynching, creating an atmosphere of fear, insecurity, and severe disruption of the livelihoods of lawful cattle traders and transporters. Q. Do you feel that the recent enforcement under the cow slaughter law is discriminatory or selectively applied? If so, can you give examples? Mohammad Ali Qureshi: The Qureshis only undertake the trade of bovines which are legal in the state. Trade is not a one-off thing; you need both a buyer and a seller. It is the farmers who come to the markets to sell their animals. Interestingly, the farmers who sell are not targeted. Once a member of the Qureshi community purchases the animal, the harassment starts. The law is stacked against us at so many levels. Animals lawfully owned and transported by traders are being seized and handed over to Gaushalas, and then treated as forfeited in compliance with the disputed provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty (Care and Maintenance of Case Property Animals) Rules, 2017. Animals can be seized for the flimsiest of reasons, including inadequate rest during transit. If a vehicle is found overloaded, a breach of rules that many transporters commit, the entire lot is seized. These animals are then handed to Gaushalas. Vehicles are unlawfully detained as security to compel payment of animal maintenance charges. Exorbitant fees are imposed on owners as a precondition for the release of vehicles, even before any guilt is legally established. This is unfair. Moreover, while the police should be the ones checking if any illegality is being undertaken by traders, in reality, we have vigilante groups running riot and extorting money from traders without fear of repercussions. Q. How long do you plan to carry on with this strike, and how many people are affected by it? Mohammad Ali Qureshi: This is a trade that has been going on for centuries, and thousands of families are dependent on it. The entire business has come to a standstill, and people are now without work. Most of those who work in this business are poor people without many job skills. They are facing ruin. It is a desperate, last-minute attempt on our part. Not speaking out against what has been happening would have compounded our problems in the near future. We had to act. As of now, no trade is happening in the 129 animal mandis in the state. Buffalo meat, which so many poor people were eating, is completely unavailable, and even the large meat units which process meat for exports are shut. Q. Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar has assured that he will not allow individuals to inspect vehicles transporting livestock. With this assurance, will you call off your strike? Mohammad Ali Qureshi: First of all, no minister has so far shown any interest in addressing our concerns. Ajit Pawar's statement in our favour is appreciated. However, he does not helm the ministries that govern the functioning of our trade. Moreover, there has been no written communication so far that makes us believe things are about to change. While we appreciate the meeting he took, we will now hold discussions within the community to determine the next course of action. However, concrete changes on the ground are necessary to ensure that people in this business can survive.
Hans India
3 hours ago
- Hans India
Delhi Assembly's maiden paperless session conducted 19-hour legislative deliberations: Speaker
New Delhi: Delhi Assembly Speaker Vijender Gupta on Saturday said that the maiden paperless session of the House concluded after legislative deliberations which lasted 19 hours and 40 minutes and included passage of key Education and GST Bills. 'The Third session of Eighth Legislative Assembly concluded, total matters discussed in 19 hours and 40 minutes,' said Gupta while addressing the media. The session commenced on August 4 and was adjourned sine die on August 8 after five sittings, he said. Gupta stated that summons for the session were issued on July 28 and the sittings were held on August 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. He stated that the House conducted extensive deliberations on legislative, financial, and public welfare matters during this period. During this period, 171 Special Mention notices were received under Rule 280, of which 62 matters were raised on the floor of the House. Gupta said that these matters, covering a wide range of civic, administrative, and policy concerns, have been referred to the departments concerned with directions to furnish replies to the members within 30 days. He added that three significant legislations were passed during the session. These included The Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Bill, 2025, introduced by Ashish Sood, Minister of Education, which was discussed over two days with participation from 24 members before being passed by voice vote. He informed that the Delhi Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2025 and The Delhi Goods and Services Tax (Second Amendment) Bill, 2025, both introduced by Chief Minister and Minister of Finance Rekha Gupta, were also passed by voice vote after due consideration. Gupta added that several important papers and reports were laid on the table of the House during the session. These included the Finance and Appropriation Accounts of GNCTD for 2023–24, the reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Finance and Appropriation Accounts, State Finances, and Welfare of Building and Other Construction Workers. He said reports from regulatory and educational bodies such as the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission, Geospatial Delhi Ltd., Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University Delhi were also laid on the table. He informed that the CAG report on the welfare of construction workers was referred to the Public Accounts Committee for further examination. The Speaker informed that the House passed congratulatory motions under Rule 114 to honour astronaut Shubhanshu Shukla for his mission to the International Space Station and to mark the launch of the NISAR satellite on July 28. He said during the sittings congratulations were extended to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and the armed forces, security agencies, and intelligence agencies for the successful execution of Operation Sindoor and Operation Mahadev. He said that a total of 20 members participated in the related discussion, including Abhay Verma, Chief Whip, and the Chief Minister.
