Lok Sabha Debates
Discussion On The Motion For Consideration Of The Finance (No. 2) Bill, 2019 Moved ... on 18 July, 2019
Seventeenth Loksabha > Title: Discussion on the motion for consideration of the Finance (No. 2) Bill, 2019 moved by Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman and also laid a copy of statement on Background and Justification for the amendments to Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 proposed as a part of Finance Bill (No. 2), 2019 (Discussion Concluded and Bill Passed).
HON. SPEAKER: Hon. Member, I will permit you in ‘Zero Hour’. You may discuss with me in my Chamber.
अब आइटम नंबर - 8, वित्त (संख्यांक 2) विधेयक, 2019 लिया जाएगा ।
माननीय मंत्री जी, आप बोलिए ।
…(व्यवधान)
THE MINISTER OF FINANCE AND MINISTER OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS (SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN): Sir, I beg to move:
“That the Bill to give effect to the financial proposals of the Central Government for the financial year 2019-2020, be taken into consideration.” माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रस्ताव प्रस्तुत हुआ :
“कि वित्तीय वर्ष 2019-2020 के लिए केन्द्रीय सरकार के वित्तीय प्रस्तावों को लागू करने के लिए विधेयक पर विचार किया जाए ।” THE MINISTER OF FINANCE AND MINISTER OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS (SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN): Thank you, Sir. Since the hon. Members will be discussing the Finance Bill today, I would just like to start the discussion with a few observations which will elaborate on the kind of things that we are aiming or proposing to do through the Finance Bill that we have brought in the Budget.
Sir, the Finance Bill, obviously, is looking at various taxation proposals. The taxation proposals are given in detail with the Budget documents. Broadly, I put them into different compartments so that when the discussion will happen, I shall be here to hear the input being given by hon. Members and, I shall, therefore, not make my introductory remarks too long. To give a broad picture, under direct taxation, about seven Acts are being amended keeping in mind the “Make-in-India” and furthering the agenda of “Make-in-India”. It is because today we need a lot more manufacturing within the country. We want to incentivise people to produce things in India.
There are several measures under the Direct Taxation that we are taking up. I will just flag them all. I am sure the Members are all doing a great deal of in-depth study into them and it might just help the conversation. So, under the Direct Taxation, there are seven Acts, which are being touched, deal with the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, the Black Money Act, the Income Tax Act, the Finance Act of 2016 which relates to the income disclosure scheme, the Finance Act No.2 which is the Securities Transaction Tax, 2004, SFURTI and the Benami Act. So, seven Acts are being touched during this Finance No.2 Bill. I am only mentioning some of them so that it will clearly pointing out the direction in which we want to take the Finance Bill. The provisions are the Reduction in the Corporate Tax rate, incentive to purchase electric vehicles, incentives to start-ups, boost to affordable housing, incentive to international financial service centre, incentives to certain non-banking financial companies, interchangeability of PAN and Aadhaar for these purposes, pre-filing of the returns, furthering the Government’s agenda on tackling black money, TDS on cash withdrawal from banks, deduction of tax by individuals or HUFs from contract of professional fee payments, compulsory filing of returns, quoting of PAN and Aadhaar, strengthening the third-party reporting mechanism, facilities for low-cost electronic payments and so on. On the Direct Taxation, I am not getting into further details but these are the items under which the relevant Acts are being amended.
Now, under the Indirect Taxation, seven Acts are being amended so that Indirect Taxation related matters will have a greater simplicity and be effective. The Acts that are being amended are the Customs Act, the Customs Tariff Act, the Goods and Services Act, the Finance Act of 2002 regarding the road cess, the Finance Act of 2018 for the special additional Excise and Central Excise which I have mentioned, CGST and IGST.
The GST alone has five different amendments which will have to take place. As a result, there will be an ease of compliance for MSME sector. There will also be an ease of paying taxes. More simplified measures will come in for prompting digital payment and for improving compliance. If all those are coming under the GST and also if the dispute redressal is going to have a quick resolution scheme, it will benefit the people. It is also being mentioned here and it gets under the Finance Act. These are under the Indirect Tax. There is also an amendment to the PMLA which is just one Act but this deals with the money-laundering cases. Therefore, we think it is important.
Financial markets are being addressed through eight Acts which are getting changed. I shall flag them all. Amendments are being made to the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956. The SEBI Act is being amended. We also have, as was referred, the RBI Act which is being amended. Both the Acts, the Insurance Act, 1938 and the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act 1972 are being amended. The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Acts both of 1970 and 1980, and the National Housing Bank Act 1987 are also being amended. For the sake of financial market, these amendments are taking place. There are specifics on which I can reply subsequently, but the specifics are also mentioned in the Budget document. I am sure, the Members are going through them. I am not going to elaborate on them here now.
Finally, we are also amending a fund-based Act, the Central Road and Infrastructure Fund Act, which actually allots funds to the States from the Centre. There is a Principal Committee which is headed by the Finance Minister and a Sub-Committee which is headed by the Finance Secretary. Both of them look into the funds which go to the States. We are bringing greater clarity into that Act. There is nothing, which is otherwise significant, that we will be changing. But the clarity, which is necessary, is what is being brought through that amendment.
So, in all, if you want to bunch them, Direct Taxes, Indirect Taxes, PMLA, financial market and the Central Road Fund: these are the five major categories under which different amendments are proposed.
I would not take more time. I am sure, I will be here to hear the Members to give us inputs.
Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak, Sir.
माननीय अध्यक्ष : माननीय सदस्यगण, आज जिन माननीय सदस्यों का ज़ीरो ऑवर लॉटरी में आया है, तीन-चार दिन से जिन माननीय सदस्यों का लगातार लॉटरी में आ रहा है और ज़ीरो ऑवर नहीं हो रहा है, मैं वित्त विधेयक के बाद सभी माननीय सदस्यों को इस संबंध में अनुमति दूँगा। जो माननीय सदस्य नए आए हैं या पहली बार चुन कर आए हैं और जिन्होंने अभी तक सदन में अपना वक्तव्य नहीं दिया है, उनको स्पेशल रूप से परमिशन दी जाएगी ।
SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY (BAHARAMPUR): Sir, before the discussion is set in motion, already a controversy has come into being as to the norms, rules, regulations, conventions, precedents etc. with regard to the financial Bills. I think, it is a very important issue. It should not be declined in an arbitrary manner.
We know that this year, two financial Bills have been brought in. A financial Bill, as we know, should be preceded by the Demands for Grants and the connected Appropriation Bill which has been passed just yesterday. The sequence in regard to the Budget, as provided in Articles 112 and 115 of the Constitution, should be followed.
I am very much in agreement with the contention of my esteemed colleague Mr. Premachandran that the Government has been encroaching upon the territory of Parliament and thereby trampling the Parliamentary privilege which has been practised since decades. The Finance Bill, 2019 was introduced in Lok Sabha on July 5, 2019. As we all know, the Finance Bill is a Money Bill which gives effect to taxation measures proposed in the Union Budget.
The Money Bill is defined in Article 110 of the Constitution as one which contains provisions related to taxation and borrowings by the Government or expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of India. The Money Bill needs the approval of the Lok Sabha and is sent to the Rajya Sabha for its recommendations. It is deemed to be passed by the Rajya Sabha if it does not pass the Bill within 14 days.
Sir, in the year 2019, in addition to tax changes which have been proposed to amend several laws such as Securities Exchange Board of India, Central Goods Services Tax, National Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling on GST matters, it has been found that the Bill amends 18 laws which are not related to tax proposals connected with the Union Budget. Therein lies the rub.
Sir, the Finance Bill have included the items which do not relate to imposition or changes in taxes. Some of the amendments are substantive in changing regulatory framework and such changes would normally be introduced as ordinary Bill in Parliament. This is our contention.
श्री राजीव रंजन उर्फ ललन सिंह (मुंगेर): महोदय, प्रेमचन्द्रन साहब ने जो सवाल उठाया था, उस पर आपने व्यवस्था दे दी । जब आपने व्यवस्था दे दी तो अब फाइनेंस बिल पर चर्चा होनी चाहिए।…(व्यवधान)
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : उस बात को क्यों नहीं उठा सकते हैं?…(व्यवधान)
श्री राजीव रंजन उर्फ ललन सिंह : महोदय, फिर से उसी बात का दोहराया नहीं जाना चाहिए।…(व्यवधान)
श्री राजीव प्रताप रूडी (सारण): महोदय, इन्होंने एक शब्द कहा है । आपने कहा कि आपकी व्यवस्था आर्बिट्रेरी रूप से है ।…(व्यवधान)
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : नहीं-नहीं, मैंने उनको नहीं कहा है ।…(व्यवधान)
श्री राजीव प्रताप रूडी : आपने ऐसा कहा है ।…(व्यवधान)
SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY : I had used ‘should not’. I am depicting the reason.
संसदीय कार्य मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री तथा भारी उद्योग और लोक उद्यम मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री (श्री अर्जुन राम मेघवाल): आपने स्पीकर के डिसिजन को चैलेंज किया है ।…(व्यवधान)
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : मैंने ऐसा नहीं बोला है ।…(व्यवधान)
श्री अर्जुन राम मेघवाल : अभी आपने ऐसा बोला है ।…(व्यवधान) आप बोलते समय ऐसा बोल गये ।…(व्यवधान)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : माननीय सदस्यगण, आपकी आपत्ति के आधार पर मैं रिकॉर्ड को चैक कर लूँगा। मैं माननीय सदस्य से आग्रह करना चाहता हूँ कि जब अध्यक्ष के रूप में मैंने व्यवस्था दे दी है और अध्यक्षीय निर्णय को आप सब अंतिम निर्णय मानते हैं, तो फिर उस पर आपको सवाल नहीं उठाना चाहिए ।
…(व्यवधान)
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : महोदय, आपके ऊपर मेरी पूरी श्रद्धा है, सब कुछ है ।…(व्यवधान) Precedent cannot be treated as sacrosanct. Precedents cannot be treated as inviolable. I am depicting the reason.
माननीय अध्यक्ष : माननीय सदस्य, आप विधेयक पर बोलिए ।
…(व्यवधान)
SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY : The reason is that the Finance Bill 2016 included amendment to create the Monetary Policy Committee to target inflation. These are all non-financial items.
The Finance Bill, 2017 amended over 17 laws which established various Tribunals. It changed the composition of 19 quasi-judicial bodies such as Securities Appellate Tribunal, National Green Tribunal and Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal.
The Finance Bill, 2018 had 218 clauses of which around 50 per cent were on issues related to taxes. For example, several laws such Securities Contract Regulation Act, 1956, SEBI Act, 1992 and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 were amended to increase the penalties for various offences.
श्री अर्जुन राम मेघवाल : महोदय, माननीय सदस्य वही बात बोल रहे हैं ।…(व्यवधान) वही सेम आर्ग्युमेंट कर रहे हैं ।…(व्यवधान)
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : क्या आप तय करेंगे कि मैं क्या बोलूँ?…(व्यवधान) स्पीकर महोदय यहाँ पर हैं ।…(व्यवधान) मैं क्या बोलूँ, क्या न बोलूँ, यह आप क्यों तय करते हैं? आप ऐसा क्यों तय करते हैं?
THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF HEAVY INDUSTRIES AND PUBLIC ENTERPRISES (SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL): Are you challenging the Speaker? You are challenging the Speaker. You cannot challenge the Speaker. Speaker has given the verdict.
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : मै कहाँ चैलेंज कर रहा हूँ?…(व्यवधान) मैं आपको चैलेंज कर रहा हूँ।…(व्यवधान)
SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL: I am Parliamentary Affairs Minister. I can speak.
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : मैं आपको चैलेंज कर रहा हूँ ।…(व्यवधान) आप स्पीकर नहीं हैं।…(व्यवधान)
SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL: I have the right to speak. …(Interruptions)
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : मेघवाल साहब, आप स्पीकर नहीं हैं ।…(व्यवधान)
SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL: I have the right to speak. …(Interruptions)
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : स्पीकर के रूप में हमारे ओम बिरला साहब यहाँ हाजिर हैं ।…(व्यवधान) आप स्पीकर नहीं हो ।…(व्यवधान) क्या आप रूलिंग देने वाले हैं?
माननीय अध्यक्ष : माननीय सदस्य, आप वरिष्ठ सदस्य हैं, आप अनुभवी हैं, मेरा आपसे आग्रह है।
…(व्यवधान)
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : महोदय, मैं किसलिए बोल रहा हूँ, उसे जरा आप सुन लीजिए । …(व्यवधान) चाहे तो उसके बाद आप मुझे बिठा दीजिए ।…(व्यवधान) आपकी जो मर्जी हो, वह कीजिए ।…(व्यवधान)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : नहीं-नहीं । माननीय सदस्य, यह आपका अधिकार है ।
…(व्यवधान)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : आप व्यवस्था पर सवाल मत उठाइए ।
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : महोदय, मैंने व्यवस्था पर सवाल कभी नहीं पूछा है ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष : ठीक है । आप अपनी बात कीजिए ।
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : महोदय, मैंने कहा कि पिछले दिनों में ऐसा हुआ करता था । आपने अपनी रूलिंग में कहा कि वर्ष 2016-17 में जो व्यवस्था दी गई है, उसका जिक्र करते हुए मैंने इन्हें पारित करने का मौका दिया ।…(व्यवधान) इसका मतलब है कि आपके पहले भी यह रूलिंग थी।…(व्यवधान) इसे दोहराने की जरूरत क्यों पड़ी जबकि पहले भी तो रूलिंग थी ।…(व्यवधान) सर ने खुद रूलिंग दी । सर ने वर्ष 2016-17 का जिक्र किया ।…(व्यवधान)
माननीय अध्यक्ष: माननीय सदस्य वित्त विधेयक पर ही चर्चा कर रहे हैं ।
माननीय सदस्य, आप वरिष्ठ अधिवक्ता हैं, लेकिन यह काम मेरा है ।
…(व्यवधान)
SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY : I am not as intelligent and as competent as you, hon. Member. …(Interruptions)
माननीय अध्यक्ष: माननीय सदस्यगण, आप सभी वरिष्ठ हैं, लेकिन यह जिम्मेदारी सदन ने मुझे दी है । इसलिए अधीर रंजन जी से मैंने आग्रह कर दिया है । इस पर व्यवस्था दे दी है ।
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : सर, मैं कभी कल्पना में भी ऐसा नहीं सोच सकता कि मैं कोई ऐसा काम करूं, जिससे आपको चोट पहुंचे, चेयर को चोट पहुंचे ।
सर, मेरी बात सुन लीजिए और मैं ऐसा क्यों बोल रहा हूं, यह भी सुन लीजिए । Currently, the Supreme Court is hearing several petitions filed against the Constitutional validity of changes made to the structure and composition of Tribunals under the Finance Bill, 2017. One of the challenges before the Court is whether the Bill was validly passed as a Money Bill or not. Note that in earlier judgement, the Supreme Court in 2018 has clarified that the decision of the Speaker on certification of a Bill as a Money Bill is not final and can be examined by courts. That is why, I am depicting the issue. …(Interruptions)
माननीय अध्यक्ष: माननीय सदस्य, अभी कर्नाटक के मामले में सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने डायरेक्शन दी है कि विधान सभा का निर्णय अंतिम निर्णय है । अभी नया डायरेक्शन हो रहा है, क्या इसके बाद भी आप ऐसा कहेंगे?
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : सर, मैं सुप्रीम कोर्ट की जजमेंट की बात नहीं कर रहा हूं ।
सर, मैं फिर दोबारा कहता हूं कि इस चेयर को छोटा करने की मेरी कोई मंशा नहीं है, यह कभी नहीं हो सकता है और कभी होगा भी नहीं ।
सर, मैं सिर्फ इसका जिक्र कर रहा हूं कि जब हमारी यू.पी.ए. की सरकार थी तो मान लीजिए कि अगर सदन में 100 बिल्स आते थे तो उनमें से 75 परसेंट बिल्स स्क्रूटनी के लिए जाते थे । पर, यह जो एन.डी.ए. की सरकार आई, इसमें जितने भी बिल्स आते हैं, उनमें से 20 से 25 परसेंट ही स्क्रूटनी के लिए जाते हैं । ऐसा क्यों है? इसका मतलब है कि सदन में जिस तरह से एक-एक बिल को लेकर चर्चा होनी चाहिए, वह नहीं हो रही है । इसका मतलब है कि हमारी प्रिविलेजेज पर एनक्रोचमेंट्स हो रहा है । इसलिए मैं चिल्लाता हूं । जैसे यह फाइनैंस बिल है ।
सर, आप बिजनेस एडवाइजरी कमेटी में हमें बोलने के लिए समय देते हैं । उस समय अगर आप एक घंटा समय निर्धारित करते हैं तो हम आपके ऊपर दबाव डालते हैं कि एक से बढ़ा कर इसे दो घंटे कर दीजिए । जैसे इस बजट के ऊपर सत्ता पक्ष ने आठ घंटे का समय कहा, विपक्ष ने दस घंटे के समय के लिए कहा, पर आपने इसे बढ़ा कर बारह घंटे या पन्द्रह घंटे कर दिया । यह क्यों है, क्योंकि आप चर्चा चाहते हैं । हम भी चाहते हैं कि इस पर चर्चा हो ।
सर, आप देखिए, इसमें 14 बिल्स हैं, जो इस तरीके से धड़ल्ले से पास किए जा रहे हैं । ऐसा ही वर्ष 2016 में हुआ, वर्ष 2017 में हुआ । मैं इसी का जिक्र कर रहा हूं, और कुछ नहीं कह रहा हूं । मैं चाहता हूं कि हमारे जो अधिकार हैं, उन अधिकारों के लिए हमें मौका दिया जाए ।
Madam, I am coming to your point. You are my teacher. You are my elder sister. Do not take it otherwise. You are fond of elephants. You have referred about elephants also in your Budget. Just as elephants are needed for catching other elephants, so also one does need wealth for capturing wealth. So, the Budget should be prepared in such a way that there must be generation of wealth. The Budget should prescribe the formula for generation of wealth. It should not be a high sounding and high blowing description of any political agenda. I must say that.
Sir, by using the Revised Estimates figures in the Interim Budget for budget numbers of revenue and expenditure, even as the provisional actual numbers vetted by the Controller General of Accounts and the Economic Survey were available, the security, the sanctity and correctness of the regular budget numbers have been called into question. In fact, the provisional actual numbers for both revenue and expenditure have been far lower than the Revised Estimates numbers used in the regular Budget. Was it a deliberate attempt to show that the budget numbers are less challenging than they really are? It is a valid question.
Yes, the Government has already brought some amendments. A plethora of amendments have been brought. Why? We are here to discuss it. But the Government is not serious to discuss the amendments in the Financial Bill because within a few minutes it is hardly possible for me to scrutinize all the amendments and react accordingly.
12.50 hrs (Shrimati Meenakashi Lekhi in the Chair) You have omitted numbers related to Government’s overall revenue and expenditure. Your response was ‘supplementary material has been provided’. But it is misleading and actually false. Discrepancy of tax revenue retained by the Centre were actually lower than the Revised Estimates by a whopping amount of Rs.1,65,176 crore, that is, 13.5 per cent of the Revised Estimates of the total tax revenue.
The total transfer of Central resources to the States has gone at a lower rate than Centre’s own receipts post-devolution of States’ share in taxes. This is because the Centre has gone on increasingly levying cess and surcharge to boost its own receipts. You are imposing cess and surcharge but it is not being devolved upon the States. Naturally, you are enjoying the earnings accrued from cess and surcharge by depriving the States. It cannot be called cooperative federalism.
Public Accounts, other than the Consolidated Fund of India, are being randomly tapped to fund programmes that ideally should be funded out of the Consolidated Fund of India. The National Small Savings Fund is being used increasingly to meet Food Corporation of India’s funding needs and keep procurement operations going. All these are adding to the public debt and are rank adhocism that would backfire. I told you that you have to generate wealth. This is the theme of my discussion.
Sir, even in the Economic Survey, it was told that there are two cycles, either vicious or virtuous. Are we maintaining vicious cycle or the virtuous cycle? That needs to be considered. Both savings and investment rates have come down under your Government. Private investments remained elusive. The failure of Public Private Partnership (PPP) model has put enormous burden on the Government finances. Of late, your Government has been resorting to unprecedented and very high level of off-budget funding to keep pace to public expenditure. Even the Government’s schemes and programmes like National Food Security are getting funded out of the extra budgetary resources. All this has undermined the fiscal honesty of the Government. The deficits shown in the Budget are, in fact, gross under estimations. The economy is in a shamble. Grands schemes like Make in India, which you referred to right now, born no fruits and seem to have come a cropper. The Government has done little but has been coining new names for old schemes making incremental progress in them but advertising them in a disproportionate manner.
We should discuss the entire Finance Bill in a dispassionate perspective. Manufacturing sector is in doldrum. Exports have not been going very well at all for many quarters. Private consumption sector, which is the main engine of the economy is hit badly. It seems that the Government cannot sustain consumption momentum through its own spending any longer. So, while the Economic Survey talks about the economy either being in a virtuous or vicious cycle at any point of time, our economy seems to be caught in a vicious cycle and is heading towards a bottomless pit under the watch of an inept and incompetent Government. You have even chosen to factor in receipts of Rs.90,000 crore from the RBI balance sheet as surpluses.
Madam, in the Budget Speech, the Finance Minister said:
“The Indian economy will grow to become a 3-trillion dollar economy in the current year. It is now the sixth largest in the world. Five years ago, it was at the 11th position. In Purchasing Power Parity terms, we are, in fact, the 3rd largest economy already, only next to China and the USA.” Madam, whether we are sixth or third, both cannot be juxtaposed and pari passu. You cannot say that we are heading for two objectives. You have to define sixth or third because it is really creating a great confusion.
In Para 10, the Finance Minister said:
It took over 55 years for the Indian economy to reach 1 trillion dollar …. we, in 5 years, added 1 trillion dollar.” Your five years mean ‘up to 26th May, 2019’. Then, she said : “Today we are nearing a 3 trillion dollar level.” This means ‘after six weeks.’ The FM said that it took 55 years to reach one trillion dollar and one trillion dollars were added in five years by May 26, 2019. Then, she says that the economy is nearing three trillion dollars, that is, one trillion dollars added in just six weeks. This is as per your description of the Budget. If it is so, then I must say that this is the fastest expansion of any economy in the history of humankind.
You are talking about five trillion US dollars at the end of five years, that is, by 2024. We all are heartily wishing it so, but I would like to know how it is probable. It is true that the Modi Government in its first innings of five years added 0.9 trillion dollars and the worth of Indian economy at the end of 2018-19 was estimated to be 2.7 trillion dollars. Since your Government had inherited 1.8 trillion US dollars from the previous Congress regime in 2014-15, enhancement of only 0.2 trillion US dollars is so encouraging. Yes, it may be, but you have to look back at the history, the 67 years before 2014. You should not say that past is a cancelled cheque. It should not be so. You should ponder over the past from where we had started our journey, our odyssey to become a developing country.
In 67 years before 2014, the economy grew to 1.8 trillion US dollars and they contributed in five years 0.9 trillion US dollars. It is to be kept in mind that the Congress had started it after Independence having inherited from the colonial master, after 190 years of constant drainage of resources from India to the UK. It was the darkest period characterised as ‘drain of wealth’ in the history of India. In fact, Indian economy grew at the rate of less than one per cent per year before independence and after independence, for 29 years, Indian economy grew at the rate of 3.5 per cent. It was not a small achievement. Madam, I am reminding that since 1991, Indian economy had a real turn towards higher growth regime from the traditional five per cent or less growth to steady seven per cent growth per year.
In the first Indian Budget of independent India, in 1947-48, - अनुराग भाई, सुनिए - the revenue receipt was Rs. 171 crore, revenue expenditure was Rs. 197 crore, leaving a revenue deficit of Rs. 26 crore. हमारे हिंदुस्तान में बहुत सारे क्लब्स हैं, क्रिकेट क्लब, फुटबाल क्लब, अभी उनका बजट इससे ज्यादा है । हम लोगों ने कहां से शुरू किया, आप इसको देखिए । The current year’s revenue budget stands at Rs. 16,49,582 crore. The revenue expenditure is Rs. 24,47,780 crore and the revenue deficit is of Rs. 4,85,019 crore.
13.00 hrs To raise the revenue resources of the country from Rs. 117 crore to Rs. 1,96,200 crore would not have been possible without the sustained economic development done under the Congress regime of 55 years and combined Opposition rules, including first innings of Prime Minister Narendra Modi ji. They also have made some contribution.
I would like to say that you should not be so boastful. You should not be so glorious in projecting yourself as the saviour of India. That boasting is meaningless because these are not comparable situations. I consider them incomparable. How much resources were drained? I am not talking of the period long time back.
In 1927 Lord Winterton told the House of Commons that there were 7,500 retired employees in Great Britain drawing annually 1,75,00,000 US dollars as pension from the Indian revenue. Ramsay Macdonald put the figure as 2,00,00,000 dollar a year. In 1783, Edmund Burke predicted that the annual drain of Indian resources to England without equivalent return would eventually destroy India. Actually that is what had happened. In 190 years they left an impoverished and famine-stricken group of human beings whose annual GDP growth in the last half a century was less than one per cent. In 1901 R.P. Dutta estimated that one-half of the net revenue of India flowed annually out of the country never to return.
Keeping that in mind, the claim of your Government, I mean the Modi ji’s II Government that they have done wonders and asking us to wait for five years for the next wonder to happen in 2024, that is attaining five-trillion dollar economy, is not correct. You are doing it without any roadmap. You do not have any roadmap, you do not have any action plan, and you do not have any mission. Out of the blue you are talking of five-trillion dollar economy. So, doing it without outlining any roadmap just means taking the people for a ride, which is something this Government specialises in. We have already appreciated it.
The growth from the present three-trillion US dollar to five-trillion US dollar would require concrete efforts. If the Indian economy does not grow annually at 8 per cent plus – I am talking of real GDP growth – it would be difficult for the Finance Minister to reach the targeted number. We will not at all be jealous if you reach the targeted number. We are simply trying to get ourselves enlightened as to how you are going to achieve the objective, rather I would say this noble objective.
Moreover, two important issues have to be kept in mind. For that to happen, price level will have to remain the same as it is today and also the value of the dollar in terms of rupees will have to remain unaltered at the current ratio.
You have already decided to go abroad for fund. You have already decided to go for external borrowings at the cost of exposure of our economy. That has been pointed out by various experts, including Shri Raghuram Rajan.
It is a lofty idea to emerge as the third largest economy of the world by reaching the five-trillion dollar economy. But for that, a direction and target has to be fixed. I am afraid that the Budget lacks that. …(Interruptions) Please give me five minutes.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Let me just tell you that 23 minutes was the time allocated.
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : मेघवाल जी ने मेरा समय काट लिया, आधा हिस्सा मेघवाल जी ने ले लिया ।
HON. CHAIRPERSON: आपका समय खत्म हो गया है और आपके दो स्पीकर्स बोलने वाले बाकी हैं । आपकी पार्टी का समय खत्म हो गया है ।
श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : स्पीकर साहब दरियादिल हैं, फाइनेंस मिनिस्टर भी दरियादिल हैं, फिर कैसी चिंता ।
HON. CHAIRPERSON: So, you conclude within two minutes.
SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY : Give me just ten minutes.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Take ten minutes and that is it.
SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY : Getting back to the drain of wealth to put things in perspective, in 1906, the Hyndman reckoned the drain to be at 4,00,00,000 dollar a year.
I am simply describing the earlier and the present position of our country. If time does not permit me, I will have to restrict my observations. If Modi Government is aiming at an economy of 1.8 trillion US dollar, it will not be possible merely by words and promises, but by concrete actions.
India launched the First Five Year Plan in 1951 with a very modest outlay of Rs.2000 crore and the outlay for the Ninth Five Year Plan was Rs36,44,718 crore. The Indian economy grew for the ten years, from 2001 to 2011 at the rate of 5.4 per cent, 3.9 per cent, 8 per cent and so on. During the financial year, 2004-05, the NDA Government led by late Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee was in power. I am not talking about the figures of 2012-13 and 2013-14. The hon. Minister knows it well.
During UPA-I and UPA-II regime, in 2003-04, the growth was 8 per cent; in 2004-05, the growth was 7.1 per cent; in 2005-06, the growth was 9.5 per cent; in 2006-07, the growth was 9.6 per cent; in 2007-08, the growth was 9.3 per cent; in 2008-09, it was 6.7 per cent. You know that global financial crisis took place at that time. In 2009-10, the growth was 8.6 per cent; in 2010-11, the growth was 8.9 per cent; and in 2011-12, the growth was 6.7 per cent.
Therefore, it proved that the Congress Party contributed much to building the Indian economy through planned economic development from the First Five Year Plan up to Seventh Five Year Plan and, thereafter undertook the massive liberalisation programme in 1991-92. It was possible to achieve this level of growth by the efforts of late Shri P.V. Narashima Rao and Dr. Manmohan Singh. If you look at the production aspect during that period, you will find that there was growth in all the sectors – industry, agriculture and everywhere.
Madam, I know that the country is gasping for employment. The employment scenario is too bleak to describe. The employment figures are heart-wrenching. It is set to touch the highest figure in the last 45 years. The rate of unemployment is sharply coming down, according to the Government data. Unemployment has been growing by leaps and bounds and export has been declining. We are heading towards a vicious circle of economy and you are boasting of 5 trillion US dollar economy. What we need is concerted effort to build our economy, much to the desire of our countrymen.
You are talking about disinvestment. Even in disinvestment, you have played a great trickery with the people of our country. The Government has claimed to reach its disinvestment target not only by Rs.80,000 crore by the year 2019, but also to surpass the target by Rs. 5000 crore, not by disinvestment but by getting one PSU buying equity of another PSU. This was the case, when the Rural Electrification Corporation acquired nearly 53 per cent share of Power Finance Corporation and the Government made an amount of Rs.14,500 crore and when the ONGC bought the Government’s stake in HPCL for Rs. 37,000 crore. The Government managed to list five companies in the financial year, 2018-19 just to raise a paltry of Rs.2000 crore and Rs. 8000 crore was acquired by share buy back from our own PSUs. That is how the Government has been playing trickery or chicanery with the people of our country.
Madam, I will mention two quick points. I am proposing to the hon. Finance Minister that she should refer to the Circular dated 24th June, 2019 of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, and reconsider and exempt pensions which were earlier tax free and now taxable to disabled soldiers who are forced to leave the service prematurely due to disability incurred in service. Please reconsider it.
I know that every now and then, you are praising Mahatma Gandhi. We are also very pleased to note it.
However, I would like to say that you better play this bhajan every day, which is good for yourself and good for the country :
raghupati raaghava raajaa raam patit paavan siitaa raam iishvar allaah tere naam sabako sanmati de bhagavaan नमस्कार ।
माननीय सभापति : अभी समय 1 बजकर 10 मिनट हुए हैं और मुझे लगता है कि 2 बजकर 10 मिनट तक के लिए सभा को स्थगित किया जाए । So, we meet again at 2.10 pm. Thank you.
13.11 hrs The Lok Sabha then adjourned for Lunch till Ten Minutes past Fourteen of the Clock.
14.10 hrs The Lok Sabha then reassembled after lunch at Ten Minutes past Fourteen of the Clock.
(Shri Kodikunnil Suresh in the chair) डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे (गोड्डा): सभापति महोदय, धन्यवाद । मैं इस देश के प्रधान मंत्री जी, वित्त मंत्री श्रीमती निर्मला सीतारमण जी और हमारे परम मित्र श्री अनुराग सिंह ठाकुर जी के प्रति शुक्रगुजार हूं कि उन्होंने देश को इतना अच्छा फाइनेंस बिल दिया है । यह इतना बड़ा मेनडेट था और उस मेनडेट में जो सबसे बड़ा कारण था, सबका साथ सबका विकास गांव । इस बजट में गरीब, पिछड़े, दलित, अमीरों से ज्यादा टैक्स लेकर गरीबों को उस टैक्स का फायदा पहुंचाना है । जो लीकेज थे, जो स्लिपेजेस थे उन सभी को ठीक करना है और इस कारण से मुझे लगता है कि इस सदी का जो यह फाइनेंस बजट है, मैं इसके बारे में जब एक्सप्लेन करूंगा तो मुझे लगता है कि लोगों के मन में जो भ्रम है, वह खत्म हो जाएगा । इस पार्लियामेंट में मेरा यह ग्यारहवां साल है और यहां मीनू मसानी, श्री अटल बिहारी वाजपेयी, श्री इन्द्रजीत गुप्ता, श्री सोमनाथ चटर्जी, श्री नरसिम्हा राव और श्री प्रणव मुखर्जी इस तरह के लोग इस पार्लियामेंट के सदस्य रहे हैं । श्रीमती इन्दरा जी, श्री नेहरु जी और श्री चन्द्रशेखर जी भी पार्लियामेंट के सदस्य रहे हैं, लेकिन ग्यारह साल में जब भी मैं कांग्रेस की तरफ से फाइनेंस बिल पर बात करते हुए देखता हूं, तो मुझे लगता है कि यह पार्टी क्या हो गई है । सन् 1885 में बनी यह पार्टी यदि आज यहां तक ही सीमित हो गई तो उसके पीछे कोई रीजन तो होगा और कांग्रेस आज …* से ग्रसित है । …* का मतलब है कि उसे कुछ आता-जाता नहीं है, लेकिन उसको लगता है कि दुनिया का सबसे विद्वान आदमी वही है, ज्ञानी आदमी वही है ।
सबसे ज्ञानी आदमी वही है । …(व्यवधान) आप यह देखें कि चर्चा फाइनेंस बिल पर हो रही थी, …(व्यवधान) मेरी बात सुनिए । …(व्यवधान) लेकिन लीडर ऑफ दि पार्टी की पूरी बात …(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Nishikant ji, please come to the subject.
…(Interruptions)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : लेकिन लीडर ऑफ दि पार्टी ने पूरी चर्चा बजट पर की । …(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Nishikant ji, you please speak on the Finance Bill. Hon. Members, please sit down.
… (Interruptions)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : मैं पूरी तरह से फाइनेंस बिल पर ही आ रहा हूं । मैं आपको यह बता रहा हूं कि उन्होंने बजट पर चर्चा की । उन्होंने यह चर्चा की 1947 में 171 करोड़ रुपये का बजट था । ठीक है, लेकिन डॉलर और रुपये की क्या पैरिटी थी, यह उन्होंने नहीं बताया । …(व्यवधान) एक रुपये का एक डॉलर था और एक डॉलर का एक रुपया होता था । …(व्यवधान) आज एक रुपये से 70 रुपये तक पहुंच गए, शायद यह भी मैंने ही कर दिया होगा । आप दूसरे के ऊपर चार्ज लगाते हैं । …(व्यवधान) उन्होंने इकोनोमी और जीडीपी की बात की । मैं आपको बताना चाहूंगा कि लीडर ऑफ दि पार्टी को यह नहीं पता है कि जीडीपी पूरी दुनिया में 1935-36 में इंट्रोड्यूस हुई और वह 1901-1902 की बात कर रहे थे । …(व्यवधान) जब पार्लियामेंट में कांग्रेस पार्टी के इतने बड़े नेता इस तरह की बात करते हैं तो देश भर में और दुनिया भर में इस पार्लियामेंट के बारे में क्या मैसेज जाता है कि वहां जो सांसद बैठे हुए हैं, उनको किसी चीज की जानकारी नहीं है । उनको यह नहीं पता है कि 1947 में चाइना हमसे पीछे था ।…(व्यवधान) मैं आपको बताना चाहूंगा कि 1980 में …(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Nishikant ji, you please speak on the Finance Bill.
… (Interruptions)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : मैं वही तो बता रहा हूं, जो उन्होंने कहा है । …(व्यवधान) 1980 में चाइना और इंडिया की इकोनोमी बराबर थी । …(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Members, please sit down.
… (Interruptions)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : मैं कांग्रेस पार्टी से कहूंगा कि भेद खुल जाए, वह सूरत हमारी नहीं है । …(व्यवधान) मैं एक-एक भेद खोल दूंगा । …(व्यवधान) नवाब वाजिद अली शाह का जमाना था और लखनऊ विलासिता के रंग में डूबा हुआ था ।…(व्यवधान) मैं आपको बताना चाहूंगा कि इस देश की इकोनोमी कैंसर से भी ज्यादा बुरी स्थिति में है । जिस तरह 2014 में माननीय नरेन्द्र भाई मोदी को इस देश की इकोनोमी मिली, उस समय जीडीपी की ग्रोथ 4.5 प्रतिशत थी । …(व्यवधान) Sir, I am not yielding…(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Are you yielding?
DR. NISHIKANT DUBEY : I am not yielding…(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: He is not yielding.
… (Interruptions)
DR. NISHIKANT DUBEY : Under what Rule?…(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Under what Rule you are raising point of order?
… (Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Are you yielding?
… (Interruptions)
SHRI DUSHYANT SINGH (JHALAWAR-BARAN): Sir, he is not yielding.
SHRI HIBI EDEN (ERNAKULAM): Sir, Rule no. 352 (vii) says that a Member while speaking shall not utter treasonable, seditious and defamatory words…(Interruptions). The defamatory word shall be removed…(Interruptions)
DR. NISHIKANT DUBEY : Sir, which word is defamatory? Is … * defamatory?…(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: I will look into it. If there is any unparliamentary word, we will remove it.
… (Interruptions)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : बताइए, कौन सा शब्द डिफेमेटरी है? जो पूरा का पूरा फाइनेंस एक्ट था । …(व्यवधान) मैं बताना चाहूंगा कि जब 2014 में मोदी जी की सरकार बनी ।…(व्यवधान) केवल टैक्स टेररिज्म चल रहा था ।…(व्यवधान) जो इनकम टैक्स है, सेक्शन्स 131, 132, 133 और 133B देखिए ।…(व्यवधान) इनकम टैक्स एक्ट और फाइनेंस बिल के बारे में सुनिए । …(व्यवधान) सर, इन लोगों को कुछ नहीं पता है । …(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Both the sides, please maintain silence…(Interruptions)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : मैं आपको बताना चाहूंगा कि पॉलिसी पैरालिसिस और टैक्स टैररिज्म का यह शिकार था ।
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Members, please sit down.
… (Interruptions)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : वेल्थ टैक्स के मामले में यह सरकार केवल टैक्स टेररिज्म कर रही थी, पॉलिसी पैरालिसिस कर रही थी । …(व्यवधान) इस एक्ट में हमने जो सबसे बड़ा संशोधन किया है, वह बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन्स एक्ट है । …(व्यवधान) फाइनेंस बिल में जिस सबसे बड़े एक्ट में हमने संशोधन किया है, वह बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन्स एक्ट है । …(व्यवधान) बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन्स एक्ट की कहानी सुनिए । …(व्यवधान) बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन्स एक्ट, लॉ कमीशन की 57वीं रिपोर्ट वर्ष 1980 में आई । …(व्यवधान) में 1980 की बात कर रहा हूं – ‘हुजूर देर कर दी आते-आते ।’…(व्यवधान) 1980 में लॉ कमीशन की 57वीं रिपोर्ट आई, जिसमें लॉ कमीशन ने कहा कि इस देश में करप्शन बहुत बढ़ रहा है, कोई गीदड़ के नाम पर, कोई बकरी के नाम पर, कोई भाई के नाम पर, कोई नौकर के नाम पर वेल्थ क्रिएट कर रहा है । कोई ड्राइवर के नाम पर, कोई कंडक्टर के नाम पर, कोई मरे हुए आदमी के नाम पर, कोई नाना के नाम पर या दादा के नाम पर वेल्थ क्रिएट कर रहा है । इस कारण से लॉ कमीशन की 57वीं रिपोर्ट में यह बात आई कि हमें बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन्स एक्ट की आवश्यकता है । आ गया । …(व्यवधान) 1983 में प्रणब मुखर्जी साहब ने इसी पार्लियामेंट में बजट स्पीच दी ।
उन्होंने कहा कि सरकार एक सबसे बड़ा संशोधन लाने वाली है, जो सबसे बड़ा एक्ट लाने वाली है, वह बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन एक्ट, 1983 है । उस समय राजीव गांधी जी प्रधान मंत्री थे । उनके दिमाग में आया कि इसे किसी तरह से ला दें ।…(व्यवधान) सर, ये बार-बार क्या कह रहे हैं, इनको रोकिए । …(व्यवधान) ये बार-बार खड़े हो जाते हैं ।…(व्यवधान) ये हमें फाइनैंस बिल पर भी बात नहीं करने देंगे ।…(व्यवधान)
सर, वर्ष 1988 में चूंकि वी.पी. सिंह बोफोर्स के मामले में सरकार से बाहर चले गए थे । बोफोर्स के करप्शन का चार्ज उन्हीं के मंत्री ने उनके ऊपर लगाया था । देश में एक मैसेज देने के लिए कि क्वात्रोची ने कुछ नहीं किया है, कांग्रेस पार्टी ने कुछ नहीं किया है, बोर्फोर्स में कुछ किया है, वी. पी. सिंह ने कुछ नहीं किया है और चूंकि इलाहाबाद का बाय इलेक्शन आने वाला था, इसलिए वर्ष 1988 में बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन एक्ट आ गया ।…(व्यवधान) मैं बताऊंगा कि क्वात्रोची कौन है? वर्ष 1988 का बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन एक्ट, यह देश को और कांग्रेस को जानने वाली बात है । जो ऐक्ट वर्ष 1988 में लागू हुआ ।…(व्यवधान) बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन एक्ट फाइनैंस बिल का पार्ट है । यदि सुनील मंडल जी आपको पता नहीं है तो आप पढ़ लीजिए ।…(व्यवधान) वर्ष 2014 तक इसका नोटिफिकेशन नहीं हुआ । …(व्यवधान) मैं आपको बताना चाहता हूं कि नोटिफिकेशन नहीं होने के पीछे कारण था कि वर्ष 1988-89 के बाद केवल वाजपेयी जी की सरकार को छोड़ दीजिए, कांग्रेस ने जितनी भी सरकार चलाई, वे सभी कोलिशन की पार्टनर थीं । उसके नोटिफाई नहीं होने का कारण यह है कि जो दानिश अली साहब बैठे हैं, इनके पार्टी के एक बड़े पदाधिकारी की संपत्ति 13 सौ गुना बढ़ गई, 400 करोड़ रुपये ।…(व्यवधान)
सुश्री महुआ मोइत्रा (कृष्णानगर): … * का क्या हुआ?
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : सर, … * जो बोल रही हैं, रोज वैली, शारदा चिट फंड के सारे पैसे बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन में लगे हुए हैं ।…(व्यवधान) सर, उसके पीछे रीज़न था ।…(व्यवधान) यहां आस-पास गजेन्द्र सिंह शेखावत जी और बीकानेर के माननीय सांसद अर्जुनराम मेघवाल जी बैठे हुए हैं । बीकानेर में जो जमीन खरीदी गई, वह … * कौन है, … * कौन है, … * कौन है? इन सभी के नाम पर, भारत सरकार के पैसे का दुरुपयोग करके बेनामी ज़मीन खरीदा गई । …(व्यवधान) यही कारण है कि पिछले 28-29 साल में, मैं आपको बताऊं कि ये सभी लंदन की प्रॉपर्टीज हैं । सारी प्रॉपर्टीज भारत के राष्ट्रीय दामाद … * के साथ है । अगस्ता वेस्ट लैंड का पैसा लगा हुआ है, पिलाटस का पैसा लगा हुआ है । नौकर के नाम पर, चाकर के नाम पर, दुबई के नाम पर, अमेरिका के नाम पर, लंदन के नाम पर, चूंकि इन्होंने पूरी प्रॉपर्टी खरीद ली थी, यही कारण है और हल्ला करने से कुछ नहीं होता है । माननीय मोदी जी ने कहा है कि न खाएंगे और न खाने देंगे।…(व्यवधान) उन्होंने चुनाव में कहा था कि वर्ष 2014 से वर्ष 2019 तक सभी को जेल के दरवाजे तक ले आए हैं । उन्होंने कहा है कि सब को वर्ष 2019 में धक्का दे कर सभी को जेल में बंद कर देंगे ।…(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Let him complete.
…(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Members, you can reply when your turn comes.
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : सर, यही कारण है कि इस फाइनैंस बिल में जब हम चेंज करने के लिए लाए हैं तो ये लोग अपोज कर रहे हैं । यही कारण है कि इस फाइनैंस बिल के माध्यम से बेनामी ट्रांजैक्शन एक्ट में, भारत सरकार ने एक बड़ा संशोधन किया है । मोदी जी ने कहा है कि वर्ष 2014 से लेकर वर्ष 2019 तक जितने करप्ट आदमी हैं, चाहे वह गोमती रिवर फ्रंट का करप्शन हो । …(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Nothing is going on record except Shri Nishikant Dubey Ji’s speech.
…(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Members, please sit down. Do not disturb him.
…(व्यवधान)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : चाहे इनके नेता का करप्शन हो, उन सभी करप्शंस के लिए, सभी को जेल में भेज देंगे ।…(व्यवधान)
सभापति महोदय, इसके बाद दूसरे एक्ट में संशोधन है – प्रिवेंशनऑफ मनी लाँड्रिंग एक्ट। …(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Nothing is going on record except Shri Nishikant Dubey Ji’s speech.
…(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Members, please sit down. Do not disturb him.
…(व्यवधान)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : सभापति महोदय, इसके बाद फाइनैंस बिल के दूसरे एक्ट में संशोधन है । 72(a) में एक बड़ा संशोधन किया है, प्रिवेंशन ऑफ मनी लाँड्रिंग एक्ट । प्रिवेंशन ऑफ मनी लाँड्रिंग ऐक्ट में सबसे बड़ा सवाल था कि एक एजेंसी दूसरी एजेंसी के साथ बात नहीं कर रही थी ।
मान लीजिए कहीं इनकम टैक्स विभाग रेड कर रहा है, कहीं ईडी रेड कर रहा है, कहीं सीबीआई रेड कर रही है, कहीं डीआरआई रेड कर रही है, कहीं फाइनेंशियल इंटेलीजेंस यूनिट से सूचना मिल रही है, तो इन सूचनाओं के आदान-प्रदान का कोई मैकेनिज्म नहीं था । इस वजह से जब तक सूचनाओं का आदान-प्रदान होता था, उसके लूप्होल्स का लोग फायदा उठा लेते थे । इसी वजह से इस एक्ट में संशोधन किया गया । मैं आपको बताना चाहता हूं कि ये क्यों दूसरे संशोधन का विरोध करते हैं । आज टेरर फंडिंग इस देश का सबसे बड़ा सवाल है । आपको पता होगा कि एनआईए हुर्रियत कांफ्रेंस की और … * के कई आतंकवादियों की प्रोपर्टी अटैच कर रही है या उन पर केस कर रही है । डिमोनोटाइजेशन का जो सबसे बड़ा इम्पेक्ट हुआ, वह इम्पेक्ट यह हुआ कि पत्थरबाजी बंद हो गई । मैं झारखंड इलाके से आता हूं, यहां नक्सलवादी गतिविधियां बंद हो गईं, लेकिन पीएमएलए में इस तरह के संशोधन की इतनी आवश्यकता थी, क्योंकि कुछ चीजों को हम पीएमएलए में नहीं पाते थे । यही कारण है कि दो-तीन दिन पहले एनआईए एक्ट में भी संशोधन हुआ और पीएमएलए में एक बड़ा संशोधन हुआ । इसका बड़ा रिपरकशन यह होगा कि जिन्होंने भी शारदा घोटाले के तौर पर, रोज वैली घोटाले के तौर पर, टेरर के तौर पर, भ्रष्टाचार के तौर पर, हुर्रियत के तौर पर, बेनामी प्रोपर्टी के तौर पर…(व्यवधान) मैं यहां बोलना नहीं चाहता, कई एक माननीय सांसद हैं, उन सभी से मेरे बहुत व्यक्तिगत, पारिवारिक संबंध हैं । मैं उनके बारे में नहीं बोलना चाहता हूं, लेकिन जो होने वाला है, वह यह है कि पीएमएलए में एक बड़ा संशोधन करके भारत सरकार ने उन सारे लोगों को जेल के रास्ते तक पहुंचाने का इस फाइनेंशियल एक्ट के माध्यम से काम किया है कि जो इस देश में चोरी करेगा, वह जेल के अंदर होगा । यह दूसरे एक्ट में एक बड़ा संशोधन है ।
महोदय, तीसरा बड़ा संशोधन ब्लैक मनी एक्ट में है । यहां ब्लैक मनी पर बहुत चर्चा होती है। ‘लम्हों ने खता की थी, सदियों ने सजा पाई है ।’ वर्ष 1972 में वांचू समिति की रिपोर्ट आई और उस रिपोर्ट में कहा गया कि सबसे बड़ा सवाल करप्शन का है और अलग-अलग क्षेत्र में अलग-अलग करप्शन है जिसके लिए भारत सरकार को काम करना चाहिए । वांचू समिति की रिपोर्ट उस समय के तत्कालीन प्रधान मंत्री जी को पसंद नहीं आई । कोई भी कारण हो सकता है और उसके बाद प्रधान मंत्री जी ने चोपड़ा कमेटी बना दी । चोपड़ा कमेटी के बाद, पार्थसारथी शोम कमेटी, राजा चेलैय्या कमेटी, कमेटी पर कमेटी बना दी जैसे ‘तारीख पर तारीख’ सन्नी देओल की फिल्म का डायलॉग है । सन्नी देओल हमारे सदन के माननीय सांसद हैं । वर्ष 2008 का एक्ट इस सदन में कांग्रेस पार्टी लाई और दो टैक्स प्रपोजल सिक्योरिटी ट्रांजेक्शन टैक्स और कमोडिटी ट्रांजेक्शन टैक्स और देश में कमोडिटी एक्सचेंज को बढ़ा दिया । कांग्रेस डेमोक्रेसी की बात करती है, उसके हिसाब से संसद का कुछ मतलब नहीं है । इसका सबसे बड़ा उदाहरण है कि सीटीटी इम्प्लीमेंट ही नहीं हुआ । मुम्बई के एक व्यक्ति मिस्टर शाह थे, उनके आधार पर कमोडिटी एक्सचेंज खुल गया । 50 रुपये की हल्दी स्पेकुलेटिव मार्केट में 150 रुपये में बिकने लगी । सारी चीजों के दाम बढ़ गए । संयोग से मैं वर्ष 2009 में इस सदन का सदस्य बन गया । कोई ऐसा सैशन नहीं हुआ, जब हमने इन्फ्लेशन पर चर्चा नहीं की । कोई ऐसा सैशन नहीं हुआ जिसमें ‘महंगाई डायन खात है’ इस पर चर्चा नहीं हुई । कमोडिटी एक्सचेंज के कारण महंगाई बहुत बढ़ गई । मैं सीबीडीटी की रिपोर्ट लेकर आया हूं, जो सीबीडीटी के चेयरमैन की अध्यक्षता में हुई थी – ब्लैक मनी कमेटी 2012. कांग्रेस के समय की रिपोर्ट है । श्री लक्ष्मण दास उस समय सीबीडीटी के चेयरमैन थे । इसके कई अन्य सदस्य भी थे । उन्होंने कहा कि सीटीटी के ऊपर वर्ष 2008 से इम्प्लीमेंट मत करो, नहीं तो पूरी की पूरी कमोडिटी एक्सचेंज खत्म हो जाएगी ।
यह करप्शन हो गया है, यह ब्लैकमनी जेनरेशन का एक बड़ा साधन हो गया है । इस पर किसी ने ध्यान नहीं दिया । हुआ यह कि कमोडिटी एक्सचेंज खत्म हो गया । कमोडिटी एक्सचेंज में उसका जो रेगुलेटर था, उसे फाइनली सेबी के साथ जोड़ना पड़ा । कौन ब्लैकमनी जेनरेट कर रहा है?
मैं मल्टी लेवल मार्केटिंग और चिट फंड के बारे में कहना चाहता हूँ । ये सारे फाइनेंस बिल के पार्ट हैं । इसीलिए मैं यह कह रहा हूँ । चिट फंड का बिल आज ही सभी संसद सदस्यों के बीच सर्कुलेट भी हुआ है । फाइनेंस कमेटी की, सीबीडीटी की रिपोर्ट थी, वह चिल्ला-चिल्लाकर कह रही थी । आज से नहीं, जब पीयरलेस का केस हुआ, उस समय से यह बात चल रही थी कि आप इसके लिए कोई-न-कोई रेगुलेशन लाओ । संयोग से, सौगत बाबू, भर्तृहरि बाबू आदि सभी फाइनेंस कमेटी के मेम्बर्स बैठे हुए हैं । फाइनेंस कमेटी ने इनसिस्ट किया, आज वह बिल पार्ट है । मल्टी लेवल मार्केटिंग का क्या हाल है? आप यह समझें कि जिस इलाके से मैं आता हूँ, बंगाल उसका पूरा-का-पूरा केन्द्र बिन्दु है, पूरी-की-पूरी ज्वालामुखी ईस्टर्न इंडिया में है । पीयरलेस, शारदा, रोज़ वैली आदि सभी का एक इतिहास है । जितने भी चिट फंड या मल्टी लेवल मार्केटिंग कम्पनीज बनाने वाले हैं, उन सबने अपने पैसे को बाहर भेज दिया है । किसी का अमेरिका में होटल है, किसी का लंदन में होटल है, किसी का कहीं है । इस तरह के ब्लैक मनी का फाइनली क्या होगा?
तीसरा बिन्दु, इस एक्ट में जो संशोधन है, यहाँ सारे लोग प्रॉपर्टी खरीदते हैं । सभी गाँवों और शहरों से भी आते हैं । सर्किल रेट और मार्केट रेट में एक बड़ा डिफरेंस है । ब्लैक मनी जेनरेशन का यह एक बड़ा सवाल है कि सर्किल रेट क्या होगा और मार्केट रेट क्या होगा और वह कितना टैक्स पे करेगा । इसके बारे में आज तक किसी ने कानून नहीं बनाया । हमने इस एक्ट में यह संशोधन किया है ।
अब गोल्ड स्मगलिंग की बात है । संयोग से, यह ऐसा पार्लियामेंट है, जहाँ सबसे ज्यादा महिलाएँ आई हैं । यह एक गोल्ड लविंग कंट्री है । शादी, विवाह, जनेऊ या किसी का मुंडन आदि हो, सभी समारोहों में गोल्ड दिए जाते हैं । मैं पढ़ रहा था, वर्ष 1947 से 2014 तक कांग्रेस के ऐसे कोई वित्त मंत्री नहीं रहे, जिन्होंने गोल्ड के ऊपर कोई-न-कोई स्टेटमेंट या टैक्स न लगाया हो । इसके कारण हाजी मस्तान पैदा हो गया । यही नहीं, वर्ष 2014 में इलेक्शन के पहले, तत्कालीन वित्त मंत्री ने कुछ कम्पनियों को फायदा पहुँचाने के लिए 80-20 स्कीम लेकर आए । 80-20 स्कीम में, उन्होंने ऐसा किया कि नेचुरल डायमण्ड की जो वैल्यू होगी, वही आर्टिफिशियल डायमण्ड की वैल्यू होगी । एक ऐसी कम्पनी, यह सीएजी की रिपोर्ट है, एक ही दिन में सोना लेकर दिल्ली के एयरपोर्ट पर आती है, …(व्यवधान) यह फाइनेंस बिल का पार्ट है । गोल्ड पर जो टैक्स लगाया है, यह उसका पार्ट है । …(व्यवधान) वह यहाँ लेकर आती है और उसी दिन हरिद्वार चली जाती है, देहरादून चली जाती है और 24 घंटे के अंदर पूरी ज्वेलरी बनाकर ले आती है । …(व्यवधान) मैं आपको बताऊँ, मैं बात नहीं कहना चाहता, लेकिन इसमें जो एक्ट है कि उत्तर प्रदेश में सारी चीनी मिलों को किस तरह से बेच दिया गया, किस सरकार ने बेच दिया, उसमें कहाँ से और कौन-से पैसे गए, इसके लिए भी हम पीएमएलए में संशोधन लेकर आए हैं । आंध्र प्रदेश में आप लोगों ने पूरी-की-पूरी जमीन बेच दी, हम उसका भी संशोधन लेकर आए हैं । यह फाइनेंस बिल है ।
राउंड ट्रिपिंग पर भारत सरकार एक बड़ा संशोधन 12 A A लेकर आई है । राउंड ट्रिपिंग क्या है? एक आदमी की एक कम्पनी दुबई में है, उसी आदमी की एक कम्पनी सिंगापुर में है, उसी आदमी की कम्पनी दिल्ली में भी है । एक ही कम्पनी खरीदती है, एक ही कम्पनी बेचती है । वर्ष 1997 में वांचू कमेटी की जो रिपोर्ट थी और वर्ष 2012 की जो सीबीडीटी की रिपोर्ट है, 40 सालों तक देश में जितने एक्सपर्ट थे, वे लगातार यह हल्ला करते रहे कि रीयल एस्टेट करप्शन का, ब्लैकमनी जेनरेशन का सबसे बड़ा कारण है । आप इसके ऊपर कार्रवाई करो, लेकिन किसी ने कुछ नहीं किया । जब हमारी सरकार वर्ष 2014 में आई, अभी के फाइनेंस बिल में हमने किया, रीयल एस्टेट सेक्टर को इतना बड़ा ख़मियाजा भुगतना पड़ रहा है, इस तरह से लोगों को जेल में जाना पड़ रहा है कि आप उसका हिसाब-किताब नहीं कर सकते हैं और माननीय प्रधान मंत्री जी ने कहा है कि जो गरीबों का पैसा है, जो आमजन का पैसा है, जिन्होंने अपनी पूरी गाढ़ी कमाई मकान में लगा दी या तो उनको मकान देना पड़ेगा या जेल जाना पड़ेगा । कांग्रेस ने यह काम कभी नहीं किया ।
इसके बाद मैं पी-नोट्स के बारे में कहना चाहता हूँ । अभी जो सिक्यूरिटी ट्रांजेक्शन एक्ट में जो सबसे बड़ा चेंज है, जिसके कारण पूरा स्टॉक मार्केट गिर रहा था, वह पी-नोट्स है । पी-नोट्स के बारे में मैं बहुत ज्यादा नहीं बोलना चाहता हूँ । इनके जो आईबी के हेड थे और प्रधान मंत्री के जो नेशनल सिक्यूरिटी एडवाइज़र थे, यदि आप कहेंगे, तो मैं उनकी चिट्ठी भी हाउस में प्लेस कर दूँगा । …* ने कहा कि ये जो पी-नोट्स है, आपकी सरकार में, …* की सरकार में, आपके एनएसए थे, आईबी के भी हेड थे और आपके एनएसए थे, उन्होंने कहा कि स्टॉक एक्सचेंज में जो ऊपर और नीचे खेल हो रहा है, यह स्टॉक एक्सचेंज जो देश की इकोनॉमी को खोखला कर रहा है, यह जो कैंसर के तौर पर आ रहा है, आप इसके ऊपर कार्रवाई करो और ‘know your customers’ को इतना टाइट करो …(व्यवधान) जो पार्ट है, आप कहोगे, तो मैं डाल दूँगा न, मैं जानता हूँ, …(व्यवधान)
SHRI HIBI EDEN : Sir, I am on a point of order.…(Interruptions)
DR. NISHIKANT DUBEY : Sir, I know what he wants to say. I know Rule 369. रूल 369 यह कहता है कि यदि उसको मेरे बात पर कोई ऑब्जेक्शन है, तो मैं इसको ऑथेंटिकेट करके डाल दूँगा । …(व्यवधान) I am not yielding. I know Rule 369.
SHRI HIBI EDEN : Sir, I have a point of order.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Under which rule you are raising the point of order?
SHRI HIBI EDEN : Rule 353, which says: “No allegation of a defamatory or indiscriminatory nature shall be made by a Member against a person, unless the Member has given adequate notice to the Speaker.
सर, क्या आपको नोटिस मिला है? He is talking about the ex-Finance Minister. जो हाइअर अथॉरिटीज में रहे, ये उन सबका नाम ले रहे हैं । वे कैसे नाम ले सकते हैं? …(व्यवधान) He should have given advance notice.…(Interruptions) I am speaking on a point of order.
संसदीय कार्य मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री तथा भारी उद्योग और लोक उद्यम मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री (श्री अर्जुन राम मेघवाल): सर, श्री निशिकांत जी ने किसी का नाम नहीं लिया ।…(व्यवधान) उन्होंने एक्स-फाइनेंस मिनिस्टर कहा …(व्यवधान) He can say, ex-Finance Minister or ex-Prime Minister. …(व्यवधान) इन्होंने नाम लिया है, तो वांचू कमेटी और सीबीडीटी कमेटी के नाम लिये हैं और किसी का नाम नहीं लिया है ।…(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: I will go through the record. If the hon. Member has mentioned any name, it will be expunged.
श्री अर्जुन राम मेघवाल: इनको बोलने दीजिए । …(व्यवधान)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : सर, ये नये सदस्य हैं, उत्साही हैं, हम इनके उत्साह का स्वागत करते हैं । उनको रूल 369 पढ़ लेना चाहिए । उनको यदि मेरी किसी भी बात पर परेशानी है, तो मैं उसको ऑथेंटिकेट करके यहाँ डाल दूँगा । वह पब्लिक की प्रॉपर्टी हो जाएगी । मैंने उस रूल का जिक्र किया है । संयोग से, मुझे पूरा नियम पता है ।
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Nishikant ji, you are making a very interesting speech.
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : सर, इम्पोर्ट और एक्सपोर्ट में ओवर-इनवॉयसिंग हो रही है । उसमें सबसे ज्यादा पैसे इस देश से बाहर चले गये । इस पर किसी ने ध्यान नहीं दिया । यहाँ तक कि डोमेस्टिक में, वर्ष 2009, 2010,2011 और 2012 में सीएजी की रिपोर्ट आई और फाइनली वर्ष 2013 में रिपोर्ट आई, केवल विदेशों में ही ओवर-इनवायॅसिंग के पैसे नहीं गये, रेल का जो डुअल फ्रेट है, उस वक्त की तत्कालीन सरकार ने, माननीय प्रधान मंत्री मनमोहन सिंह जी के नेतृत्व में, इन्होंने कहा कि डोमेस्टिक फ्रेट अलग लगेगा और एक्सपोर्ट का फ्रेट अलग लगेगा । उसके कारण 30 हजार करोड़ रुपये का नुकसान हुआ, क्योंकि उनके पास कोई मैकेनिज्म नहीं था । शुरुआत में मैंने कहा कि नवाब वाजिद अली शाह का जमाना था, लखनऊ विलासिता के रंग में डूबा था । खाओ, पीओ। हम भी खाएंगे, तुम भी खाओ, किसी के बारे में चिन्ता मत करो । आम आदमी से कोई मतलब नहीं है ।
वांचू कमेटी की रिपोर्ट वर्ष 1972-73 में आई । एमबीबीएस, इंजीनियरिंग में इस तरह से एडमिशन हो रहे हैं कि कैपिटेशन फी के रूप में एक करोड़ से दो करोड़ रुपये लिये जा रहे हैं । ये केवल कैश में लिये जा रहे थे । लिये जा रहे थे या नहीं? वे पैसे कहाँ जा रहे थे? क्या आपने उस एक्ट में संशोधन किया?
यदि हम एनएमसी बिल लेकर आए हैं, यदि उस करप्शन को हम रोकना चाहते हैं, पिछले तीन-चार सालों से इस सदन और उस सदन के सदस्य इस बिल को रोकने की कोशिश कर रहे हैं। उसमें क्या परेशानी है?
वह करप्शन का कारण है, ब्लैक मनी जनरेशन का कारण है, इसलिए उसको रोकने की कोशिश कर रहे हैं । मैं आपको बताता हूं, यहां सुप्रिया जी बैठी हैं, वर्ष 2011 में यशवंत सोनेवाल का डीजल और पेट्रोल करप्शन का सबसे बड़ा साधन था । वर्ष 2011 में यशवंत सोनेवाल की हत्या हुई या नहीं हुई? वर्ष 2005 में इसी डीजल स्कैम के कारण मंजूनाथ की हत्या हुई या नहीं हुई? डीजल और पेट्रोल करप्शन का सबसे बड़ा कारण था या नहीं था? …(व्यवधान) वह पैसा कहां जाता था? …(व्यवधान) आज यही कारण है कि इस फाइनेंस बिल में इलैक्ट्रिक कार में टैक्स कन्सेशन दिया गया है । …(व्यवधान) इलैक्ट्रिक कार के लिए हम फंड बनाएंगे, ताकि डीजल. पेट्रोल और कैरोसीन तेल से लोगों का ध्यान हट जाए, इससे कोई ऑल्टरनेट एनर्जी आ जाएगी । इस कारण से यह फाइनेंस बिल अच्छा है या नहीं है? यह भविष्य की चिंता करने वाला बजट है या नहीं है? मैं आपके माध्यम से अपनी ये बातें कहना चाहता हूं ।
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Your time is going to be over.
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : सर, मुझे पता है कि आप यह बोलेंगे । मैं केवल दो प्वाइंट्स पर लास्ट पांच-सात मिनट बोलना चाहता हूं । मैं 35-40 मिनट बोलने वाला था, अभी तो मात्र 25 मिनट ही हुए हैं।
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Thirty minutes are already over. Please come to the main point डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : मैं आपको सबका विश्वास और लीगेसी के बारे में बताता हूं कि टैक्स के लिए एक डिस्प्यूट मेकेन्ज़िम इस बजट का सब से बड़ा पार्ट है । वह लीगेसी क्या है? मैं इस लैगेसी को देख रहा था । हसन अली खान के ऊपर भारत सरकार ने 1 लाख 10 हज़ार करोड़ रुपये का टैक्स डिस्प्यूट डाला हुआ है । हसन अली के पास यह किस का पैसा है?
कुंवर दानिश अली (अमरोहा) : आपने छ: सालों में पता नहीं किया? …(व्यवधान)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : हमें सब पता है, बाकी सब पता चल जाएगा । …(व्यवधान)
चेयरमैन सर, स्विस गवर्नमेंट ने जो कुछ अकाउंट्स दिए हैं, उनमें एनएमए, एमएमए, एएम, टीएएस, आरएएस, डीएस और एसएलएस के नाम हैं । …(व्यवधान) मैं आपको बताऊं कि इस सरकार में …(व्यवधान) मैं लीगेसी डिस्प्यूट खत्म करने के लिए ये बातें कह रहा हूं । …(व्यवधान) ये लोग बड़ा हल्ला-हंगामा करते हैं । …(व्यवधान) मैंने वर्ष 2011 में यहां एक भाषण दिया था । …(व्यवधान) मैंने कहा कि लिंचिंस्टाइन बैंक से जो अकाउंट आए हैं, हमारे यहां लिंचिंस्टाइन से अकाउंट आए, जर्मनी से अकाउंट आए, पनामा से अकाउंट आए और स्विट्ज़र्लैंड से अकाउंट आए । …(व्यवधान) वर्ष 2011 में लिंचिंस्टाइन से अकाउंट आया था । …(व्यवधान) मैं किसी का नाम नहीं लेना चाहता, लेकिन उस वक्त के कांग्रेस पार्टी के तीन तत्कालीन मेंबर ऑफ पार्लियामेंट थे, मैंने कहा कि इनका नाम उस लिंचिंस्टाइन अकाउंट में आ रहा है । …(व्यवधान) मैं यह नहीं कहता कि उनका अकाउंट है या नहीं है, लेकिन एक सांसद होने के नाते भारत सरकार को यह बताना चाहिए कि अखबारों में यह जो बातें छप रही हैं या सोशल मीडिया में जो बातें आ रही हैं, उसके बारे में क्लैरिफाई करना चाहिए ।
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Please conclude.
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : सर, मैं बस दो मिनट में अपनी बात खत्म कर रहा हूं । …(व्यवधान) सरकार को ऑन दि फ्लोर ऑफ दि हाउस यह बताना चाहिए कि हमारा नाम नहीं है, कोई मेंबर ऑफ पार्लियामेंट इन्वॉल्वड नहीं है । …(व्यवधान) उस वक्त के तत्कालीन वित्त मंत्री, जो बाद में देश के राष्ट्रपति हुए, मैं उनका नाम नहीं लेना चाहता, उन्होंने कहा कि किसी का कोई अकाउंट नहीं है । मेरे इसी भाषण के आधार पर हर्ष रघुवंशी …(व्यवधान) संसद को इस पर गर्व करने वाली बात भी होनी चाहिए और सोचने वाली बात भी होनी चाहिए । …(व्यवधान) मेरे भाषण के ऊपर एक पीआईएल हुई, जिसको रामजेठमलानी और शांति भूषण ने लड़ा ।
वर्ष 2012 में उसी भाषण के आधार पर सुप्रीम कोर्ट का जजमेन्ट आया कि एक सांसद के प्रश्नों का सही जवाब संसद में नहीं मिलता है । फैक्ट यह है कि उस वक्त के कांग्रेस के तीन मेंबर ऑफ पार्लियामेंट के नाम लिंचिंस्टाइन अकाउंट में थे, बाद में यह प्रूफ हुआ, इस कारण से एसआईटी बनाई जाए, लेकिन एसआईटी नहीं बनी । …(व्यवधान) इसलिए ‘सबका साथ, सबका विकास’ में यह जो लैगेसी प्रॉब्लम है कि आपने फॉरेन में जो अकाउंट बना दिया है, जो पैसा डाल दिया है, इस कारण इस बिल में यह लाया गया है । मैं अंत में केवल इतना ही कहते हुए कनक्लूड करूंगा कि यह मोदी जी की सरकार है । …(व्यवधान)
श्री गणेश सिंह (सतना) : यह भी बता दीजिए कि एसआईटी किसने बनाई? …(व्यवधान)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : पहली ही कैबिनेट में, माननीय मोदी जी की 26 मई, 2014 को जो कैबिनेट बनी, उसी में एसआईटी बनी । एसआईटी ने अपनी काफी रिक्मनडेशन्स दी हैं, जिनमें दो करोड़ रुपये न निकालने की इस तरह की जो बातें हैं कि कैश का काम नहीं कर सकते हैं, मैं इनके बारे में केवल इतना ही कहूंगा कि इस फाइनेंस बिल से कई चीज़ों पर काम हो सकता है, जो चीज़ें लोगों को चुभने वाली या लोगों को चूसने वाली हैं । संस्कृत का एक श्लोक है :
आपदा मापतंतिनां हितो अप्यायाति हेतुताम, मातृजंघा ही वत्सस्य स्तंभभवति बंधनेन ।
चेयरमैन सर, यह समय ऐसा है, जो आपद् का समय है । इन्होंने एनपीए, लीगेसी, बैंकिंग व्यवस्था, आपने सारी इकोनॉमी की व्यवस्था को खोखला और कैंसरस कर दिया था । जैसे मां कभी-कभी बंधन के तौर पर खड़ी हो जाती है, उसी तरह हमारे प्रधान मंत्री जी मोदी जी इस देश को चलाने के लिए आपके साथ हैं । आपका विकास होगा, देश का विकास होगा, जनता का कल्याण होगा । इन्हीं शब्दों के साथ जय हिंद, जय भारत ।
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Hon. Members, before 6 o’clcok, we have to conclude this discussion on the Finance Bill. Hon. Speaker, has already told that we would take up ‘Zero Hour’ at 6 o’clock. Therefore, I would request the hon. Members to conclude their speeches within the allotted time.
DR. T. THANGAPANDIAN (CHENNAI SOUTH): Hon. Chairperson, Sir, I thank you profusely for giving me this opportunity to make my maiden speech on the Finance Bill.
As a debut parliamentary Member from Chennai South Constituency, I ascend from the land of Tamil Nadu, a land where the great Sangam poet, Kaniyan Poongundranar, 2000 years ago transcended all the geographical boundaries and declared ‘Yaadhum oore, yavarum kelir’ meaning the whole world is my home and all human beings are my kith and kin.
I ascend from the land of social justice and equality wherein the great poet Thiruvalluvar transcended, evened all the divisions in the society 2000 years ago and denounced the water tight Varnashrama Dharma and declared ‘Pirappokkum ella uyirkkum’ meaning all are equal by birth.
I am equally proud to state that I hail from the land of Dravidian reformation and Tamil cultural renaissance pioneered by iconoclast rebel, Thanthai Periyar, Dravidian Demosthenes Arignar Anna, founder leader of our DMK Party Muttamizh Arignar Dr. Kalaignar, the legendary literary icon and the phenomenonal political statesman for whom I am perennially indebted for my political career.
Sir, I stand here cherishing the memory of my father, late Mr. Thangapandian, and I want to place on record my sincere thanks to my Party leader, Thalapati Mr. M.K. Stalin, for whose statesmanship, leadership and his guidance, the Tamil Nadu people have given a solid mandatory support for federalism and secularism. …(Interruptions). This is my maiden speech. I have every right to give an elaborate introduction. I thank him for having reposed faith and trust in me and for having allowed me to enter this portal for which I am grateful to him …(Interruptions).
HON. CHAIRPERSON: This is her maiden speech. That is why, she is giving some introduction.
… (Interruptions)
DR. T. THANGAPANDIAN : Sir, here I am reminded of Dadabhai Naoroji who in his maiden speech told that he was the first Indian member to get elected to the British Parliament. He said that on behalf of India, I thank the British people. On behalf of our Party, I thank the Tamil Nadu people for their mandate for federalism and secularism.
The present Lok Sabha is vibrant with 78 women MPs and I humbly and happily share the fact that I am the second woman MP to get elected from the Chennai South Constituency after 28 years. It is a constituency which has been represented by luminaries like Anna, Dravidian ideologist, Mr. Thiru Murasoli Maran, our former President, Shri R. Venkataraman and the present DMK Party leader, respected hon. Member, Shri T.R. Baalu. I thank my constituency people and I promise them that I shall put my best foot forward.
At the outset, I would like to congratulate our first fulltime woman Finance Minister, Shrimati Nirmala Seetharaman, for having presented her maiden Budget. I am doubly happy to congratulate her as Thamizhachi – Tamil woman – since she is the daughter of our soil.
Sir, I envisage the hon. President’s Address, hon. Prime Minister’s speech, the Finance Minister’s Budget and the Finance Bill as a I square of mirage. It is a mirage which has given the citizens a lot of promises and rosy picture that all will be well with the vision and mission of 5 trillion dollar economy by 2024-25.
During his last stint, our hon. Prime Minister had made a lot of promises that all the black money would be brought back, ten crore jobs would be generated, but alas, nothing concrete was done.
With the unemployment rate of 6.1 per cent trumpeting of a $5 trillion economy by 2024 is a big farce. India’s major strength lies in its conventional labour driven industries and its development depends mainly on the skilled young manpower. But misadventures like demonetisation, badly handled GST, devaluation of the rupee have created tremendous unemployment. The Budget is actually a Fudget. I would term it as a Fudget and I will tell you why.
Table 2.5 of Statistical Appendix in Volume II of the Economy Survey reveals that actual Net Tax Revenues in 2018-19 are provisionally estimated at Rs. 13.16 lakh crore, but in the Budget, it has shown as increase of Rs. 14.84 lakh crore. That is why I term it as a Fudget and I term it as a Much Ado About Nothing Budget.
Sir, coming to the discussion on the Finance Bill, I am again here reminded of the late Dadabhai Naoroji. He had given a very famous speech titled as `India must be bled’, a title which he borrowed from Lord Salisbury. I quote:
“As India must be bled” These words were delivered by a Secretary of State for India, Lord Salisbury himself.
“Let us clearly understand what is meant by bleeding a nation. It is perfectly true that when there is a Government, people must pay taxes, but there is a great difference between taxing people and bleeding people.” Sir, through you, I would like to ask the Government – you waive tax for corporates, you disinvest public sectors, you neither rebate tax for middle class, common people nor waive farmer’s loan but increase the tax thereby escalating the prices of petrol and diesel. Doesn’t it make India bleed all the more?
If you still believe in what Gandhiji told -- `the crux of the nation lies in the welfare of the farmers’, then you would not have given them just Rs. 6000, a pittance amount and leave them in the lurch. It is a pittance amount. The greatest grouse, I record here, that the people of Tamil Nadu still have is that our hon. Prime Minister has not visited the Gaja cyclone-hit areas and has turned a cold shoulder to it.
Sir, I would like to refer to the increase in the gold prices. Is it not making the country bleed? The hon. Finance Minister said that there will be a shift from women-centric to women-lead India. If that is true, then why has the import duty on gold been hiked from 10 per cent to 12.5 per cent which would directly hit the middle-class Indian women? Because even now the savings of Indian household is in gold. For under-privileged section of women, for working class women even making a Mangal-Sutra in gold has become a far-fetched dream now. Does it not make India bleed all the more?
Sir, the Finance Bill, if I may use the term, is a poor cousin of the Budget since it parrots the policies of the Government -- a pro-corporate and an anti-common men Government with a thrust on disinvestment which makes India bleed all the more.
They say the `destiny of the nation’ lies in the way it treats its women, children, under-privileged section, physically challenged people, writers, artists and above all the minorities. But there is lynching and poaching. Does it not make India bleed all the more?
As a Vernacular poet I can see and sense disappointment and despair. Plurality, regionalism, diversity, Federalism and Secularism, everything has been tamed into one sloganeering of `One Nation, One Election, one Ration Card and now one Grid’.
Sir, Robert Walpole, later Earl of Orford spoke on the House of Lords Bill in 1719 and made this observation. I quote:
“Among the Romans, the wisest people upon earth, the Temple of Fame was placed behind the Temple of Virtue, to denote that there was no coming to the Temple of Fame but through that of Virtue.” If this scenario continues, our virtues will be lost and India will bleed all the more.
I have a few queries to be clarified. My South Chennai constituency comprises a lot of fishermen populace. Till today, agriculture, fishery and farming are not treated as industries in the real sense of the term, besides the fact that they are destined to bear the brutal brunt of natural calamities like cyclones, tsunami and depletion of resources.
The hon. Finance Minister has announced ‘Matsya Sampada Yojana’ as part of the Blue Revolution with an aim to bring all fishermen under the umbrella of farmers welfare programmes and assures to promote aqua culture through easy access to credit. I quote from Money Control News. It says:
“A special Fisheries and Aqua Culture Infrastructure Development Fund of Rs. 7522 crore has been allotted last year but this fund will be used to attract private investment in creation and management of fisheries infrastructure facilities.” How will you expect an ordinary fisherman, son of the sea, who sets out to the sea everyday, make his living with nil investment to get benefits?
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Please conclude now. Your allotted time is already over.
DR. T. THANGAPANDIAN : Sir, this is my maiden speech. Please give me five more minutes.…(Interruptions)
This Yojana will not be for the benefit of the indigenous fishermen but for the macro fishing industry magnets. Private investment is the key word here.
Chennai’s largest IT hub is in my constituency. In this era of technological advancement, the paradigm shift is now on artificial intelligence. What are the steps taken to sensitise this industry towards opportunities that will open up due to 5G spectrum?
Sir, T. Nagar and Mylapore, the two Assembly constituencies, are the most important cluster areas of MSME. The Finance Minister has just reiterated the sanctioning of loans upto Rs. 1 crore in 59 minutes for GST approved SME units. I appreciate it but the bankers are wary of disbursing the loans accordingly. Could the Government furnish any data of the number of loans actually distributed through this scheme?
Sir, there are major amendments in income tax and other direct taxes domain, indirect taxes, GST, etc. Insertion of new provisos in Section 139 makes the following categories of persons also to file ITR irrespective of their income. They are individuals spending more than Rs. 2 lakh on foreign travel in a year and individuals spending more than Rs. 1 lakh on electricity in a year. How is it possible? This is a country wherein joint family system is still prevalent. How would a family with many members limit their electricity expenses within Rs. 1 lakh a year?
There is a Tamil poem from the Sangam Literature, Nattrinai. It says:
“Maram Saa marundhum Kollar, Mandhar;
Uram chach seyyar, uyarthavam; valam kedap Ponnum Kollar, Mannar Nannuthal! Naam tham unmaiyin uzhame.” The meaning of this poem is as follows: Generally, men of great stature would not strip of the medicinal plants to that extreme of letting it to perish. They would not do penance at the cost of their prowess to become weak. Similarly, a good natured king would not burden his citizens with heavy taxes leading them to poverty. The world survives since men of such stature never falter.
With anguish and pain, I want to draw the attention of the hon. Minister through you to the allocation of Rs. 50 crore to appoint Hindi teachers in the non-Hindi speaking States which is a clear design to promote the Three Language Formula, a pet theme of this Government. Here, I want to emphatically state that the DMK Party and our leader, Thalapathy, Shri Stalin upholds only the Two Language Formula. I would like to remind the statement of our party founder leader, Perarignar Anna. He said:
“I have authorised three Legislative Laws in Tamil Nadu State Assembly as its Chief Minister, namely, renaming the Madras State as Tamil Nadu, endorsing legal sanctity to marriages without religious customs and rituals and adhering only to the Two Language Formula. And no one can dare either to scrap or do change these laws!” I would like to conclude with the lines of Shelly. He said: “I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed!” The Budget makes India bleed all the more.
15.00 hrs SHRI P.V. MIDHUN REDDY (RAJAMPET): Thank you, Sir, for letting me talk on the Finance (No. 2) Bill, 2019.
I would like to put it into two perspectives – one is the National perspective, and the other is the State perspective. From national perspective, the Budget is full of hope, and a lot of good schemes have been inducted this time, like Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana, Housing Scheme, and Har Ghar Jal. But if you see it from our State’s perspective, we are disappointed. Nothing, which is mentioned in the AP Reorganisation Act, has been put into the Budget. There is no mention about the State of Andhra Pradesh.
Sir, I would like to talk about our concerns. The first one is regarding special category status for our State. Special category status is not something which we are demanding. I would like to clear the air about this special category status. On March 2, 2014, in the Cabinet Meeting, the then Prime Minister generated a Cabinet Note saying that ‘Special Category Status be given to Andhra Pradesh, and it should be implemented immediately.’ I also have the Cabinet Note here.
Sir, it is disappointing that in the last five years, nothing substantial has been done, and also nothing has been mentioned about special category status. There are a few Members who spoke even in the House that 14th Finance Commission objected to special category status but it is not a fact as Mr. Abhijit Sen, who is a member of the Finance Commission, clearly wrote a letter saying that Finance Commission has got nothing to do with special category status, and it is only a decision of the Executive. I also have the letter here which says that Finance Commission has nothing to do with special category status, and it is only a decision of the Executive. With the stroke of a pen, we can accord special category status.
I will also tell you the reason for this. Our State was split against our wishes. We did not want our State to be split because we did not have a capital, and nothing was there. But we were promised a lot of things. An Act like the AP Reorganisation Act was also enacted which promised a lot of things. But if you see today, no word has been kept. Whatever word was given on the floor of the House, it has not been fulfilled. To give the magnitude of the situation in Andhra Pradesh, I would like to again quote. I have spoken about it earlier also. I just want to again bring to the notice of the House that the debt of our State from independence for the residual State of Andhra Pradesh was Rs. 90,000 crore, and in these five years, our debt has increased to a huge sum of Rs. 2,60,000 crore due to which we are having an interest burden of Rs. 20,000 crore per year. If such is the situation over a couple of years or after three years, it will be difficult for us even to pay the salaries, let alone development of the State. The 14th Finance Commission projected that the revenue deficit would be Rs. 22,000 crore between 2015 to 2020, and it was promised that the State would be given enough support. It was even mentioned in the Prime Minister’s Address that the State will be adequately supported. But if you see, many words were given on the floor of the House but no word has been kept. What has been done? Nothing has been done. They are not keeping up any promise. We want support for our State. We have been unjustly divided. We expect support from the Government. It is also the right time to act because the revenue deficit of Rs. 22,000 crore which was expected in the last five years is close to almost Rs. 63,000 crore. How do you expect a new State without a capital, and without proper infrastructure to generate such an amount? That is our question. A lot of industrial incentives have also been promised, and one or two incentives have been announced for our State. But to give a real fact, if you see what actually came to our State, in spite of these incentives, you will find nothing substantial has come in.
If you see the report of Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, DIPP, not more than Rs. 4000-5000 crore investment has come in for the past five years, except for one year, where we got Rs. 9000 crore. If they check all the IEMs filed, you will see the stark reality where nothing substantial is happening. We are not getting proper employment. We have a lot of youth. They are all highly disgruntled because we cannot see a proper future where our youth is going to get a job. So, special category status, as was promised, is our demand. We want special category status to be granted. We are not asking for something which is new. It is what you had promised. It is time to keep up your promise, your words. That is what we are demanding. If you get into the AP Reorganization Act, which was passed on the floor of this House, a lot had been promised like steel plant in Kadapa. There is no mention about it in the Budget. There is no fund allocation for that. We have been given package for backward districts under special development package, but even the funds allocated have not been allotted for the last two years. Even in the Prime Minister’s speech, it was told that development package on the lines of Koraput-Bolangir-Kalahandi package will be given. But there is no mention about it also. It was told that special package like Bundelkhand package will be given, but so far there has been no mention about it. The AP Reorganization Act in Section 94, para 1 clearly states that the Central Government shall take appropriate fiscal measures including offering of tax incentives to the successor States to promote industrialization and economic growth in both the States. We would like to know what you have given in the past five years and what is the result of that? We would like the Minister to specifically talk about it.
There is no mention of Durgarajapatnam Port or the Vizag-Chennai industrial corridor. Even the metro rail project is going at a snail’s pace. Nothing has started, let alone the Vishakhapatnam and Tirpuati airports which were promised to be made international airports. Forget about developing the airports, the flights are getting cancelled. We requested the Minister not to cancel the flights because the State should be treated in a special way.
One more issue is this. The Polavaram project is like a lifeline for our State. It is very important. I would like to bring to the notice of the hon. Minister that Polavaram project is a national project which was supposed to be built by the Central Government. But as part of the NDA Government’s recommendation, the State Government would construct it. One thing we are not able to understand. Polavaram project cannot be built in one year. It will take around 6-7 years and now it is going to take 2.5 years more to construct it. The Central Government said that they will stick to the initial proposed amount and they will not increase the amount for Polavaram project. It is not fair as it is an irrigation project. The foundations may vary and the cost is bound to change. There are escalations. So, we request that total cost for Polavaram project be borne by the Central Government as it was promised.
One more issue on which I need a clarity from the hon. Minister. The 15th Finance Commission, as part of devolution of funds to the States, is taking the 2011 population Census. Earlier it was taking 1971 population Census. But if you take the 2011 population Census, States like Andhra Pradesh, which effectively implemented family planning will be grossly affected because our population has been controlled very well. There have been a lot of effective measures taken by the Government. If you see, there have been a lot of slogans like “we two and ours two” and all other effective planning measures. But this is not going to be considered according to the 1971 census and if our population is down and funds are going to be down, the population control measure is not going to matter. We wish that justice is done in this and proper measures are taken, so that States which effectively implement population measures are not at a disadvantage.
There is one more scheme which is Har Ghar Jal. We would like to know the modalities of this scheme because our Government is planning to give piped water to every households in the State within two years, but not in five years as was mentioned by the hon. Minister. We wish the Government comes out with modalities and helps us soon.
There are two more important points. One is regarding GST.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Please conclude.
SHRI P.V. MIDHUN REDDY : Yes, Sir.
I would like to bring to your notice that that hon. Minister spoke of elephant story that ‘if you do not pay proper taxes, your fields will get trampled.’ Here is the case -- there are people, who have been doing Government contracts much before even GST was implemented. After the launch of GST, various Governments are not paying GST benefits to these contractors.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Now, please conclude.
SHRI P.V. MIDHUN REDDY : Give me two minutes, Sir.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: No. You have already spoken for 10 minutes.
SHRI P.V. MIDHUN REDDY : In the BAC, it was decided that we will have enough time for discussion on the Finance Bill.
I am just keeping track of my time. I need two more minutes.
HON. CHAIRPERON: Your allotted time is already over.
SHRI P.V. MIDHUN REDDY : Just give me two more minutes, Sir.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Within one minute, please conclude.
SHRI P.V. MIDHUN REDDY : Sir, various Governments are not giving the GST benefits to the people doing Government contracts. But Department concerning GST is rather imposing penalties on them and filing cases on them.
So, I would request the Central Government to derive a mechanism whereby if GST benefit does not reach them, the business community should be prevented from imposing penalties and things like that.
Lastly, I would like to say that if ‘Make in India’ has to be successful, the banking system has to be put in place.
Due to paucity of time, I would stop here and conclude my speech. Thank you.
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : Hon. Chairman, Sir, I rise to speak on the Finance Bill.
The Finance Bill should normally deal with the tax proposals of the Government. But this Finance Bill deals with a lot of other things, which it should not deal with. I would mention them later.
Before starting my speech, I have a suggestion to make to the Government. I heard Mr. Nishikant Dubey in silence; and I suggest that he be made a Minister of the Government. Since he knows so much about corruption that has taken place, why is he not made the chief policeman of the Government so that he can catch all the wrongdoers? Why does the Government not catch all the wrongdoers and put them in jail? Who is preventing them from doing so? They have an absolute majority. The shouting about old time corruption is again an attempt to confuse the people.
15.12 hrs (Shrimati Meenakashi Lekhi in the Chair) Madam, I shall remind you about two promises that the Modi Government had made to people in 2014. First, all black money from abroad will be recovered and Rs. 15 lakh will be put in the account of every Indian citizen; and second, two crore employment per year will be generated. Five and a half years are over but those promises have not been fulfilled.
Mr. Modi has proved to be an effective salesman, a dream merchant who does not deal in reality.
Madam, 8th November, 2016 was a black day for India when demonetisation of Rs. 1,000 and Rs. 500 notes was effected. It was promised that all black money in the country will be captured. But three years later, the black money has not been captured. The Government has not given any figures as to how much black money has been recovered due to demonetisation. They still talk about black money.
We want a white paper from the Government as to how many MSME units were closed because of demonetisation. When the hurried implementation of GST took place, we had protested. We said that we support GST, in principle, but it should not be done in a hurry. As a result of hurried implementation of GST, many small businesses have been closed in the country. The Finance Minister has not even mentioned demonetisation in her whole Budget Speech. Demonetisation is a bad dream, best forgotten. That is their theory.
Madam, the Finance Minister says that the effort of tax proposals in the Finance Bill will aim to stimulate growth, incentivise affordable housing and encourage start-ups by releasing entrepreneurial spirits.
Madam, we are talking of a situation when the growth rate has fallen to 5.8 per cent. The unemployment is at an all-time high at 6 per cent and growth of unemployment is the highest in 45 years. I may also mention that there is a decline in car sales and consumption is ebbing. The non-banking financial companies’ crisis has aggravated the credit crunch. The FDI is decelerating as well.
Also, exports have fallen to a 14-year low as a percentage of GDP and unlikely to get an upgrade. Thus, the present scenario, with the factors which drive GDP growth, is very pessimist. You need 8 per cent growth per year to reach $5 trillion economy by the year promised. Will there be a miracle? That is what the Government hoping. It is very unlikely. If our youth workforce becomes the world’s workforce, then only it is possible.
The Budget declared that it would bring new programmes to skill youth for foreign employment. So, it is back to brain-drain and remittances. But given the Government is unskilled – as skilling is hard to get people’s hopes up – we will reach $5 trillion economy but not under Modi 2.0. No, we will not reach $5 trillion economy in the promised year.
Let me directly go to the tax proposals. What are the tax proposals? There are surcharges on Income Tax – earning over Rs. 2 crore, the surcharge is 25 per cent and for earning over Rs. 5 crore, it is 37 per cent. One complaint is that the surcharges and the cesses do not go to the State. They are not in the divisible pool. We protest against all surcharges and cesses on behalf of the State.
The corporates have been given an advantage because this Government is depending on private investment for surviving. … (Not recorded) are essential for their survival. So, all companies upto Rs. 400 crore have been brought at a Corporation Tax rate of 25 per cent. Tax on cash withdrawals is now two per cent over Rs. 1 crore. …(Interruptions)
DR. NISHIKANT DUBEY : Madam, there is point of order under Rule 352. …(Interruptions) महोदया, इन्होंने जो कोट किया है ।…(व्यवधान)
प्रो. सौगत राय : मैडम, ये प्रोफेशनल हेकलर बन गए हैं ।…(व्यवधान) इन्होंने खुद भाषण दिया है ।…(व्यवधान) इसके बाद ये रूल 352 दिखा रहे हैं ।…(व्यवधान) They are trying to stifle …(Interruptions) मैडम, ये प्रोफेशनल हेकलर हैं । इनकी बातों की तरफ ध्यान नहीं देना चाहिए ।…(व्यवधान) He is the representative of corporates.…(Interruptions)मैडम, कुछ नहीं है ।…(व्यवधान) He has no point. …(Interruptions) Everyday he wants to be popular with the Government and become a Minister by raising objection during Opposition’s speeches. …(Interruptions) That is his way to become a Minister. …(Interruptions) He wants to stifle our voices.…(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Sougata Ray.
… (Interruptions)
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : Madam, I am losing my time. …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: No, we will keep an account. In any case, you have four minutes left.
… (Interruptions)
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : He is a professional heckler. …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: It does not matter. We will listen to him.
… (Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Please read Rule 352.
… (Interruptions)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : महोदया, रूल 352(7) है । इन्होंने सीधा-सीधा करप्शन का चार्ज लगाया है।…(व्यवधान) इन्होंने अडानी और अंबानी का नाम लिया है ।…(व्यवधान) यदि मिस्टर सौगत राय प्रूव कर दें कि इस टैक्स प्रपोजल में अडानी और अंबानी को एक पैसे का भी फायदा हुआ है, 25 परसेंट कारपोरेट वाले में, तो ये क्या, मैं इस सदन में इस्तीफा दे दूँगा ।…(व्यवधान) ये गलत बात कह रहे हैं ।…(व्यवधान)
प्रो. सौगत राय (दमदम): मैडम, ये बोगस हैं ।…(व्यवधान)
DR. NISHIKANT DUBEY : He is making false allegation. …(Interruptions)
माननीय सभापति : एक मिनट रूकिए । निशिकांत जी, आप पहले रूल 352 (7) पढ़िए ।
…(व्यवधान)
DR. NISHIKANT DUBEY : Madam, under Rule 352(VII): A member while speaking shall not— “utter treasonable, seditious or defamatory words;” ये कह रहे हैं कि सरकार ने कारपोरेट सेक्टर का 25 परसेंट टैक्स कंसेशन करके अडानी और अंबानी को फायदा पहुँचाया है ।…(व्यवधान) यदि अडानी और अंबानी को इससे एक भी पैसे का फायदा होगा, तो मिस्टर सौगत राय मैं इस सदन में इस्तीफा दे दूँगा और यदि आप में भी हिम्मत है, तो आप भी इस्तीफा दे दो ।…(व्यवधान) आप सरकार के ऊपर इस तरह का कोई ऐलिगेशन नहीं लगा सकते हैं ।…(व्यवधान) मैं बड़ी शिद्दत के साथ कह रहा हूँ कि मैं लोक सभा से इस्तीफा दे दूँगा ।…(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON : The point of order has been raised. The two names will be removed. Rest, you can continue.
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : ‘Adani’ is not the name of a person; ‘Ambani’ is not the name of a person…(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: These are names.
… (Interruptions)
PROF. SOUGATA RAY: These are companies. …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Surname is a name.
… (Interruptions)
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : ‘Adani’ is not a name of an individual; ‘Adani’ is a title. …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Please be seated. Do respect the Chair.
… (Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Please sit down.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI B. MANICKAM TAGORE (VIRUDHUNAGAR): …* …(Interruptions) Please give respect because I represent a constituency which has 15 lakh voters. Please respect them. …(Interruptions) Please do not tell me to sit down. …(Interruptions) Do not treat me like a student. … * …(Interruptions) You are also a Member; I am also a Member. …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Please sit down.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI B. MANICKAM TAGORE : … * …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Sit down, please.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI B. MANICKAM TAGORE : We both are Members. You are in the Chair now. Therefore, I respect you …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: I am also a Member.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI B. MANICKAM TAGORE : Yes, you are also a Member. Otherwise, I am a Member. …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: You are a Member; so am I a Member. Please sit down. Do not speak while you are sitting.
… (Interruptions)
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : ‘Adani’ is nobody’s name; ‘Ambani’ is nobody’s name. They are names of companies…(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Sit down. There are students from a school sitting in the Gallery. What impression are you setting before them?
… (Interruptions)
AN HON. MEMBER: What impression the students will get? They will get the impression that the Treasury Benches are defending … (Not recorded) …(Interruptions)
THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF HEAVY INDUSTRIES AND PUBLIC ENTERPRISES (SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL): You cannot insult the Chair. …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Please sit down.
… (Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Parliamentary Affairs Minister.
… (Interruptions)
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : Madam, he is a Minister of State. …(Interruptions)
AN HON. MEMBER: He should be suspended. …(Interruptions)
SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL: Yes, Prof. Sougata Ray, I am a Minister of State. …(Interruptions)
मैडम, हम यहां फाइनैंस बिल पर चर्चा कर रहे हैं । यह गम्भीर चर्चा है । मैं सदस्यों से अनुरोध करूंगा कि चेयर पर कोई भी बैठे, वह चेयरमैन की हैसियत से ही नहीं, बल्कि स्पीकर की हैसियत से बैठा है । इसलिए हम लोगों को इतनी इंसल्ट नहीं करनी चाहिए, यह ध्यान में रखें।…(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Sougata Ray, I expect you to know better. These are names of people. The names of companies are different.
… (Interruptions)
डॉ. निशिकांत दुबे : मैडम, यह बात तो और भी सीरियस है । यदि अडानी और अम्बानी टाइटल है, कम्युनिटी है तो ये पूरी कम्युनिटी को यह कह रहे हैं । यह तो और भी सीरियस है ।…(व्यवधान)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: You continue with your speech and then conclude.
… (Interruptions)
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : Madam, let me again state that the two names that I named are not names of individuals. They are names of companies; they are titles which may belong to anybody. Anyway, I will abide by your ruling.
… (Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Just one Minute; Mr. Mahtab.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB (CUTTACK): Not only in our country, in Germany and also in the United States, companies are there in the name or surname of persons. It is not only the two names which have been mentioned by Prof. Ray. There were names like Tata and Birla earlier, which were also said in this House earlier. My request to you, Madam, is this. Let the Secretariat go into those records and come to a conclusion. Let us hear what Prof. Ray has to say.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Go through the records; absolutely fine.
PROF. SOUGATA RAY (DUM DUM): You go through the records.
The other thing is two per cent tax on cash withdrawals. If cash withdrawals are over two per cent, then what will the tea gardens do? They have to pay lakhs of rupees to their workers all in cash every month. So, they will have to pay extra two per cent tax. Tea gardens are already sick.
What will they do? That is why, I oppose this. Road and infrastructure cess has been increased by one rupee per litre of petrol and diesel. Excise duty has also been increased. This is totally an inflationary step. It will create problems for the common man. It will cause price rise. I am opposed to this.
Customs duty on gold and precious metals will be increased from 10 to 12.5 per cent. I oppose this also because this is not resource mobilization. Thousands of Bengali workers are employed in the jewellery trading in Mumbai and Surat. Many of them will lose their jobs, if customs duty on gold and precious metals are raised. Newsprint import has been increased to 10 per cent customs duty. This will hit the newspaper industry. It seems that the Government wants the newspaper industry to shut down. That is why, they are creating conditions so that they cannot indulge in free expression. That is why, I am opposed to this.
Last year and year before that, I had opposed inclusion of non-tax proposals in the Finance Bill. Now, there are major legislative changes proposed in the Finance Bill and they include Disputes Resolution Scheme, Central Goods and Services Act, Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, National Housing Bank Act, 1894, Insurance Act, 1938, Security Contract Regulation Act, 1956 etc. Madam, the point that has been raised by Shri Premachandran earlier has to be repeated here that this Finance Bill is a Money Bill. It cannot be discussed in the Rajya Sabha. So, it escapes proper legislative scrutiny. That is why, they are bringing these Bills through the Finance Bill so that they cannot be discussed in Rajya Sabha. Changes in the taxation regime may vary according to the Government. Such changes can only be done by the directly elected House like ours. However, structural changes in our legal system which are unrelated to taxation should only be done through the established mechanism of scrutiny and deliberation by both the Houses of Parliament. There is no reason to exclude the Rajya Sabha from deliberating on the changes of a permanent nature to the legal system and having its opinion addressed. This Finance Bill also includes GST amendment.
Madam, with the introduction of this Bill, it seems that for the first time since the advent of the new indirect tax regime, the Government has sought to bring amendments to the GST legislation through the Finance Bill.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : The time lost has been counted and more than that also has been counted.
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : Thank you Madam, you have been very kind and you are generally kind. …(Interruptions)
This poses with some questions as to whether the Government can amend the GST law by including the proposal in the Finance Bill. Would this be a trend of the Government to introduce amendments to GST legislation during the Union Budget subject to GST Council recommendations? Above all, can the Government propose any amendment in the Bill which goes beyond the recommendations of the GST Council? This is an important point. GST is the representative of federalism. Now, if you include GST amendment in a Finance Bill which cannot even be discussed in the Rajya Sabha, you are actually taking away the powers of the GST Council and of federalism. What you should have done is to bring a GST amendment Bill separately. So, that would be discussed in both the Houses of Parliament. Now, putting GST amendment into this, is something that I strongly oppose.
There are only two things which have to be supported in this Budget. One is that they have removed the customs duty on defence equipment. It is good, if it is needed for the country.
The other thing is that they have clarified the matter with regard to Angel Tax as far as the start-ups are concerned.
I think this will help the new Start-ups. Overall, this Budget does not give any direction to the people. It will not release the animal spirit of entrepreneurship in the country. It will not take the country to a five-trillion-dollar economy. It will not relieve the farmers, who are committing suicide, from their extreme misery. It will further exacerbate and hand over the family silver to private parties like selling of Air India and shedding of Rs.1,09,000 crore of shares of Public Sector Undertakings to private parties. That is why, we shall fight against this Bill.
Why are we not stopping to protest? To quote what Nazrul Islam said:
“Ami sheidin habo shanto, bidrohi ranoklanto Jedin utpiriter krandanrol akashe batashe dhonibe na Atyacharir khargokripan bheem ranabhume ranibe na Ami shei din habo shanto, bidrohi ranoklanto”.
So, we shall not be quiet. Stop, they are tortured. That is why, I oppose the Finance Bill in toto.
श्री राजीव रंजन उर्फ ललन सिंह (मुंगेर): माननीय सभापति महोदया, सबसे पहले मैं माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी को इस बात के लिए बधाई देता हूं कि उन्होंने एक महत्वाकांक्षी बजट इस सदन में पेश किया और अपने लम्बे भाषण के दौरान एक बार भी पानी पीने का काम नहीं किया । यह दर्शाता है कि इस बजट के जो लक्ष्य हैं, उनको प्राप्त करने के लिए उनके अन्दर पूरा आत्मविश्वास भरा हुआ है ।
इस बजट में इन्होंने कई कल्याणकारी योजनाओं की घोषणा की है । इसमें स्टार्ट अप्स के बारे में योजना है या हर घर नल का जल पहुंचाने की योजना है, ये सारी ऐसी योजनाएं हैं, जिससे इस देश का एक-एक नागरिक, एक-एक घर लाभान्वित होने वाला है । उस महत्वाकांक्षी बजट के लक्ष्य को प्राप्त करने के लिए इस फाइनेंस बिल के माध्यम से डायरेक्ट एंड इनडायरेक्ट टैक्स में अमेंडमेंट्स और टैक्स के जो प्रस्ताव लाए गए हैं, हम उनका पूरे तौर पर समर्थन करते हैं ।
उनका लक्ष्य है 5 ट्रिलियन डॉलर के आर्थिक विकास के लक्ष्य को प्राप्त करना । आर्थिक विकास के लक्ष्य को प्राप्त करने के लिए निश्चित तौर पर अमेंडमेंट्स लाना होगा । अमेंडमेंट्स क्या आए हैं? इनमें ब्लैक मनी पर हमला है, मनी लांड्रिंग पर हमला है और बेनामी सम्पत्ति पर हमला है। पीछे भी इन्होंने नोटबंदी की, जिसकी अभी सौगत राय साहब चर्चा कर रहे थे । नोटबंदी का फायदा हुआ या नहीं, यह तो आप जोड़ते रहिए, लेकिन कई राज्यों में आप लोगों का और आपके गठबंधन का सफाया हो गया । आपको उसका पता चले या नहीं चले, आम जनता को उसका पता चल गया।
मैं आपको एक बात बता दूं । जब नोटबंदी हुई थी, तब मैं मुंबई गया था । मैडम, एक उदाहरण दे रहा हूं । एक ठेले वाले से हमने पूछा कि नोटबंदी से आप लोगों को बड़ा घाटा हो रहा होगा, क्योंकि पैसा नहीं चल रहा है? उसने कहा कि हम लोग बड़े खुश हैं । हमारे पास भी पैसा नहीं है और मर्सिडीज पर जो चल रहा है, उसकी पॉकेट में भी पैसा नहीं है । यह स्थिति है । आम लोगों का समर्थन नोटबंदी के प्रति था । …(व्यवधान) आप हल्ला करते रहिए, चिल्लाते रहिए, उससे कोई फर्क नहीं पड़ने वाला है । ब्लैक मनी पर हमला हुआ है । हम वित्त मंत्री जी से आग्रह करेंगे कि जब चौकीदार मजबूत होता है, जब चौकीदार कड़क होता है, तो पीछे जो इधर-उधर करने वाले लोग हैं, उनमें छटपटाहट होती रहती है । उनकी चिंता छोड़ कर अपने लक्ष्य को प्राप्त करने के लिए आप आगे बढ़िए ।
हम सारे संशोधन कर समर्थन करते है, समय कम है । बिहार में उनके गठबंधन के लोगों का डिफेंस कॉलोनी में मॉल बन रहा था । पूरे देश और दुनिया में सम्पत्ति थी, इन सब को पता है, उसके समर्थन में खड़ा हैं और कह रहे हैं । इर्न्फोर्समेंट डॉयरेक्टरेट और सीबीआई जानबूझकर फंसा रही है । इर्न्फोर्समेंट डॉयरेक्टरेट और सीबीआई साक्ष्य के आधार पर कोर्ट गई है, आप कोर्ट चले जाइए, कहां इधर बाहर झटपटा रहे हैं । आजकल पब्लिक को स्टेटमेंट देने से वह नहीं समझने वाली है ।
हम कह रहे हैं कि इनको छटपटाहट होगी और उसकी चिंता नहीं करनी चाहिए । सरकार ने आर्थिक विकास के लिए जो लक्ष्य निर्धारित किया है, उसको प्राप्त करने के लिए जो भी काम हो, उसे आगे करना चाहिए । मैं सिर्फ सरकार को सलाह दूंगा । मेरी सलाह है कि जो टैक्स अमेंडमेंट्स के माध्यम से आप लोगों पर डाल रहे हैं, हम टैक्स कलैक्टिंग एजेंसी के बारे में सलाह देना चाहते हैं, टैक्स कलैक्टिंग एजेंसी को पीपुल्स फ्रेंडली बनाना चाहिए, लोगों को उसके प्रति उत्तरदायी बनाना चाहिए । आज सबसे बड़ी समस्या क्या है? देश में 85 प्रतिशत लोग ईमानदारी से टैक्स देना चाहते हैं । अगर एक ईमानदार आदमी को इनकम टैक्स का नोटिस मिल गया, वित्त मंत्री जी ने दो घंटे के बजट भाषण में एक गिलास पानी नहीं पिया, लेकिन उसको एक नोटिस मिल जाने पर वह पांच बार पानी पीएगा । पन्द्रह परसेंट लोगों को कोई फर्क नहीं पड़ता है, उसमें कई ऐसे लोग हैं जिनको छटपटाहट है, पन्द्रह परसेंट लोग आराम से सूटबूट पहन इनकम टैक्स ऑफिस जाते हैं और अपना काम करा कर निकल जाते हैं और जो 85 परसेंट लोग हैं, जब वे इनकम टैक्स ऑफिस जाते हैं तो उनको परेशानी होती है । आप इसे पीपुल्स फ्रेंडली बना सकें तो यह सबसे बेहतर होगा । आज देश में ऐसी धारणा बन गई है कि टैक्स लिया जाता है, टैक्स लिया नहीं जाता है, टैक्स देना है, इस तरह की प्रेरणा पैदा करने की भावना है । आज लोग मंदिर जाते हैं, धार्मिक स्थल जाते हैं, करोड़ों रुपये दान देकर चले आते हैं लेकिन सरकार के खजाने में उन्हें टैक्स देने में डर लगता है । अगर एक बार टैक्स दिया तो कहीं दफ्तर के चक्कर न लगाने पड़ें । उसको आप जितना पीपुल्स फ्रेंडली बना सकें तो आम लोगों के मन में यह भावना पैदा होगी कि अगर हम टैक्स का पैसा देने जा रहे हैं तो कोई हमें तंग नहीं करेगा, तबाह नहीं करेगा ।
जीएसटी की चर्चा हो रही थी । जीएसटी का हमारी पार्टी ने, जब यूपीए की सरकार थी और जीएसटी ला रही थी, तब हमारी पार्टी ने जीएसटी का समर्थन किया था । जिस समय जीएसटी आया था, उस समय हम एनडीए के पार्ट नहीं थे । हमारी पार्टी एनडीए की पार्ट नहीं थी । लेकिन हमारी पार्टी ने जीएसटी का समर्थन किया था क्योंकि जीएसटी एक सही कदम है और टैक्स चोरी को बचाने के लिए सही रास्ता था, एक सुलभ रास्ता था । आज जीएसटी के बारे में कई तरह की भ्रांतियां हैं । हम माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी को सलाह देना चाहते हैं कि जीएसटी के बारे में कई भ्रातियां हैं । ऐसा नहीं है कि लोग जीएसटी नहीं देना चाहते हैं, ईमानदारी के साथ जीएसटी देना चाहते हैं । जो छोटे व्यपारी हैं, वह भी जीएसटी देना चाहते हैं । जीएसटी के रिटर्न भरने और जमा करने में कई तरह की भ्रांतियां हैं । हम सरकार से चाहेंगे कि जीएसटी के बारे में जितना साधारण से साधारण सिस्टम हो, उस सिस्टम को लागू कीजिए ताकि लोगों को प्रेरित किया जा सके कि आप जीएसटी जमा कीजिए, आपको कोई परेशानी नहीं होगी । आज अगर कोई जीएसटी रिटर्न गलत भर देता है, उसमें दो तरह के लोग हैं, एक विलफुल डिफॉल्टर हैं । जो विलफुल डिफॉल्टर हैं उस पर जितनी सख्ती कर सकते हैं, आप कीजिए । जो इनोसेंट डिफॉल्टर हैं जिनकी गलती या नहीं जानकारी के कारण जीएसटी के रिटर्न फाइल में गलती होती है, उसे बाइफरकेट कीजिए । उनको परेशानी नहीं हो ।
अंत में, मैं सिर्फ एक बात कहना चाहता हूं । रघुराम राजन कमेटी की बात आंध्र प्रदेश के साथी भी उठा रहे थे । माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी यहां बैठी हैं, अनुराग जी, वित्त मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री भी यहां हैं, मैं उनसे आग्रह करता हूं, रघुराम राजन कमेटी की रिपोर्ट पिछड़े राज्यों के बारे में है, उस पर आपको फैसला करना चाहिए । आप पिछड़े राज्यों को आर्थिक मदद दीजिए । जब तक पिछड़े राज्य विकसित नहीं होंगे तब तक देश विकसित नहीं हो सकता । जब तक पूरा देश विकसित नहीं होगा तब तक हमारा देश दुनिया में विकसित देश के रूप में नहीं जाना जा सकता ।
मैं पिछड़े राज्यों को मदद करने की अपील के साथ अपनी बात समाप्त करता हूं । धन्यवाद।
SHRI RAHUL RAMESH SHEWALE (MUMBAI SOUTH-CENTRAL): Madam, I thank you for giving me the time to speak on the Finance Bill, 2019.
At the outset, I would like to thank the hon. Finance Minister, Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman and MoS, Shri Anurag Thakur for presenting the first Budget of NDA Government of 17th Lok Sabha headed by hon. Narendra Modiji. This Budget is committed to the development of the country. I rise here to speak on Finance Bill and support the Budget with my request for certain provisions of additional allocation in respect of overall development of Mumbai to develop it as a world-class city.
Madam, as is very well known, Mumbai is the primary economic engine of India with the presence of several international and indigenous businesses and thus, regarded as the financial, industrial, commercial and celluloid capital of India. Mumbai is home to various multinational companies and financial market players such as foreign institutional investors and bankers. This gives us an opportunity to develop it as an international city, for which norms have been drawn up.
Surprisingly, Mumbai has the highest percentage of slum-dwellers among the metropolitan cities and it requires the setting up of a Mumbai Development Plan Implementation Authority which must be funded by the Central Government. For a proper development process, lands are being planned and earmarked for public utility services such as hospitals, community centres, schools etc. However, since the land belongs to the State and Central Governments and some private persons, there has been an unending delay in handing over the same to MCGM. I feel proud to say that Mumbai city alone contributes 30 per cent of total tax revenue to the Exchequer. So, implementation of 100 per cent development plan for Mumbai is very much necessary. Therefore, for a planned and holistic land development of Mumbai, a special package of Rs. 14,00,600 crores may be sanctioned and released at the earliest.
Madam, Mumbai’s public buses run by BEST have been in trouble, with footfall of passengers gradually decreasing. Due to this, the BEST is running in huge losses up to Rs. 1,100 crore today. Therefore, I request the hon. Finance Minister to allocate Central fund of Rs. 2,000 crore to the BEST for smooth operation of its services.
Hon. Finance Minister, in her speech, stated that the Government’s focus is on making India a digital economy and with the focus of achieving this goal, the Minister provided various measures by which cash transactions charges could be reduced, including TDS on cash withdrawals over one crore rupees. However, there has not been any significant development in making digital payments accessible to the under-privileged sections of the society that predominantly use cash for their transactions. The highest percentage of cash transactions is of small denomination transactions, and in order to make the country a truly digital economy, the Government must adhere to a bottom up approach by educating the masses about the benefits of digital payments along with developing ways to incentivise digital payments.
Madam, hon. Prime Minister has a vision to make Mumbai slum-free by 2022. Mumbai’s real estate development comprises of two categories. Yet in reality, banks are majorly limiting themselves to providing financial support to the corporates, while SRA projects in Mumbai are either stopped or progress very slowly. This is particularly problematic considering the fact that Mumbai houses Dharavi which is the largest slum in the country and the developers do not have funds to finish the SRA projects.
NBFCs are giving loans to selected builders charging 19 to 27 per cent interest to selected projects and following the onset of the NBFC crisis there has been a further decrease in the loan disbursement for SRA projects. In 2017, the Maharashtra Chief Minister proposed to the then Urban Development Minister to include SRA projects in affordable housing so that these projects would get project funding from the banks. Consent for the same was sent from the Urban Development Ministry to Finance Ministry, but the advisory is still stuck in the Finance Ministry. Banks are not willing to fund SRA projects. The State Bank of India signed an MoU of Rs. 2,500 crore to various SRA Schemes in Mumbai but not a single rupee has been released in the last two years. Around 42 per cent of Mumbaikars live in slums in unhygienic conditions without proper lighting, air and ventilation. Due to lack of SRA funds, developers investing in projects have been forced to commit suicide due to lack of financial resources made available to them, the most recent case being that of Mukesh Savala who has committed suicide in desperation. There is a need to take strong steps to bail out stuck slum redevelopment schemes. Otherwise, Mumbai will never be a slum-free city.
The real estate sector must be recognised as a priority sector by the Reserve Bank of India as well as by other banks and given the ‘industry’ status, which will ease the project approval process and will attract foreign investments in several forms. As a result, buyers will be able to avail tax benefits and a reduction in stamp duty. Therefore, it becomes pertinent to rationalise the tax slabs to accelerate the growth of housing and construction sector. It is noticed that a lot of Government land is being encroached because of which there is a huge revenue loss. My suggestion in this respect is to make a provision for auditing of Government lands and that should be reflected in the Budget.
My Parliamentary Constituency, Mumbai South-Central harbours all three lines of Mumbai Railways, that is Western, Central and Harbour Lines. Mumbai has an overstressed suburban railway system and, hence, to ease it down, we need provisions for emergency medical care for accident victims, introduction of car rakes to reduce overcrowding, more FOBs and subways to prevent the hazards resulting from crossing railway tracks, CBTC system for signalling. These measures will require substantial amount of expenditure, for which I request the hon. Minister for additional allocations.
I am sure that the hon. Railway Minister, Piyush Goyal ji will agree to the necessity and importance of the suggested measures for the safety of the rail commuters. In addition to this, due attention has to be given to Dadar Railway Station situated on the Western as well as on the Central Line. Despite demarcation of the railway stations to ensure that hawkers do not overcrowd near the stations, the menace has not been curbed. I hereby propose an overall renovation of Dadar Station and its precincts into a transit hub with appropriate oversight development.
Smaller companies with a turnover of total receipts of up to Rs. 250 crore are subject to income tax at a concessional rate of 25 per cent instead of the regular rate of 30 per cent. The current Finance Bill has increased this ceiling of Rs. 250 crore to Rs. 400 crore. This will bring a large chunk of small companies within the concessional tax rate of 25 per cent, leading to a significant loss in revenue.
I appreciate that the current Finance Bill has provided an additional deduction of Rs. 1,50,000 in respect of interest on housing loans to individuals who will purchase their first house costing up to Rs. 45 lakh. This will help such individuals save tax up to Rs. 45,000 per year.
With a view to ensuring compliance with summons issued and information sought under the Benami Property Transactions Act, it is proposed to provide for levy of penalty for failure to comply with summons to provide information under the Act.
I thank you Madam for giving me this opportunity to speak on the Finance Bill, 2019. I am sure that the hon. Finance Minister will consider my suggestions and demands in respect of allocation of Central funds for overall development of Mumbai city. Thank you.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB (CUTTACK): Madam, I should have said this in the last but due to constraint of time that we have today, I will first move the amendments. The points that I want to raise relate to 25 per cent of total income which was mentioned here.
The Government has granted a big relief to small companies by reducing the rate of income tax from 30 per cent to 25 per cent. The previous Finance Minister, Shri Arun Jaitley said that we will try to bring down the tax to 25 per cent which will be at par with other Asian countries so that we can become more competitive. It includes the company which has a turnover of up to Rs.400 crore as against the normal rate of 30 per cent income tax which is applicable to larger companies. However, I do not understand the logic as to why this benefit is being extended to companies only. There are many partnership firms and limited liability partnerships which run businesses on small scale. But they are still subjected to 30 per cent income tax. I have an amendment to that effect. If the hon. Minister replies on this, I will be happy.
The second issue relates to 10 per cent customs duty on newsprint. Through this Finance Bill, customs duty of 10 per cent on the import of newsprint is being levied. Earlier, there was no customs duty. Most of the big newspapers and even medium newspapers also import newsprint or they used to import.
The Government has said that it wants a level-playing field for the domestic newspaper industry. But my information is that everything is sold out in the domestic newspaper industry. There is no glut in the market. Still, I fail to understand the level-playing field which the Government is mentioning. This would put a heavy burden on the industries. According to my information, the customs duty will affect the small and medium newspapers in a very big way. It will also add to the cost as the newsprint is also subjected to 5 per cent GST, last year. This 10 per cent customs duty will put a big strain on the newspaper industry. It will affect the bottom line of newspapers.
Madam, I would just like to mention, not in detail although I have all the information. Initially, Shri N.K. Premachandran said that it is an academic discussion. But I think, it is not an academic discussion. I would go back to the history of 16th Lok Sabha. Some Finance Bills or amended laws were not connected to the taxation regime in the country. In 2016, Monetary Policy Committee was set up through Finance Bill. In 2017, there were changes in the composition of tribunals, such as, Securities Appellate Tribunal and Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal. There were seven other authorities including Competition Appellate Tribunal which were also repealed. This happened in 2017. In 2018, there were 218 clauses, half of which were matters relating to imposition of taxes.
Of course, Prof. Ray stands every time and says that the non-taxable bills should not become a part of the Finance Bill. I have a point here to make. In our Parliamentary system, all bills should go through the detailed scrutiny process. However, in case of Finance Bill which falls in the category of a Money Bill does not go through the similar process. Bypassing this process results in litigation.
Currently, the Supreme Court is hearing several petitions. That questions the constitutional validity of changes made to the structure of composition of tribunals as was done by the Finance Bill, 2017. This is bad and it undermines the role of Parliament.
One thing I would like to mention here. I think today or yesterday, an article has come about this in the newspaper. Parliament is in shackles. Of course, it has different connotations. Our Parliament is not as sovereign as the British Parliament is.
Our Indian Parliament is not sovereign to that extent because whatever law we make is also determined by the court of law, namely, the Supreme Court. So, the final decision is not ours at all. If we bypass the Parliament and bring certain amendments through the Finance Bill, then it is definitely getting challenged in the Supreme Court. This is what is happening now with regard to the 2017 amendments that had taken place. So, it is not only an academic deliberation, which should be made on the Finance Bill. It also impinges on the right of the Parliament and the Parliamentary procedures.
There are two major aspects that I would like to mention here relating to the direct tax and indirect tax. Therefore, I think that the hon. Chair would give me some time as these deals with figures. The Central Government’s tax revenue for the financial year ending March 2019, as reported by the Controller General of Accounts (CGA), fell short of the Interim Budget estimates that was presented in February by 0.9 per cent of GDP. The CGA figures show that the direct tax collection of 2018-19 fell short by Rs. 74,774 crore while those of indirect tax collection were short by Rs. 93,198 crore.
We all know that the economy is not growing as it is supposed to be, but here are the figures of the CGA. These are very well stated and this new Budget estimate for gross tax revenue is Rs. 90,936 crore, which is lower than what was projected in the Interim Budget. This is despite the higher surcharge that is imposed as income tax for those earning more than Rs. 2 crore and a range of hikes levied on customs duties. The gross tax revenue-GDP ratio is budgeted to slip from 11.9 per cent in 2018-19 to 11.7 per cent in 2019-20. While the direct tax to GDP ratio is expected to go from 6.4 to 6.3, the indirect tax to GDP ratio will reduce from 5.5 to 5.3. Significantly higher non-tax revenues have been budgeted than the estimates of the Interim Budget to fill the gap on the tax revenue side.
Very many times when the elections are held in the month of April and May, we are having two Budgets, and we would also get the benefit of comparing those two Budgets. This happened in 2014, and also now in 2019. We also had it before that in 2009, and before that in 2004. So, by having two Budgets in one year, it becomes easier to understand and also to find out how the Government is functioning and how the economy is behaving.
Dividends and profits from Public Sector Enterprises are budgeted at Rs. 1,63,526 crore compared to Rs. 1,36,072 crore in February. This includes an extraordinarily large increase in dividends …(Interruptions)
Madam, I am just on my first point.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Mr. Mahtab, you had just five minutes. I have extended it by four more minutes.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : Yes, I understand, but we sat till 12 o’clock in the night.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I know about it.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : Those were just Demand for Grant of one Ministry. I would urge upon you that this is the Finance Bill, and we hardly go into the details of the Finance Bill. I have already heard seven speeches today, and I think that these are matters that need to be deliberated. This is the place where we can do it. Otherwise, it does not get discussed in the Standing Committee of Finance either, where we discuss about the policy.
Madam, I will just quickly run through the points. This includes an extraordinarily large increase in dividends from the RBI from Rs. 68,000 crore it paid last year, and this year it is mentioned that it will be Rs. 90,000 crore. 16.00 hrs I think, today Supriya ji would help me out. It should be given in stages, not in one go. That has also come out.
The basic question which has haunted me is this. Why have exports today hardly grown? The Government should answer this. Is it because India is a high cost economy that cannot compete with the Asian peers? Land, labour, capital, electricity, freight rates, corporate tax, income tax all add up to the higher cost. We need to make our products competitive. Former Finance Minister, Shri Arun Jaitley had said that India would cut its corporate tax to 25 per cent to compete with other Asian countries. Has this vision been abandoned? Corporate tax is yet to be cut for large companies with a revenue of over Rs.400 crore. The amendment deals with that, which I am going to move. In any Asian country, corporate tax has fallen today to 15 to 20 per cent. Today, we are still stuck at 30 per cent. The new peak income tax rate today in our country, which is 42.7 per cent, is a clear disincentive.
Foreign portfolio investors organised as trusts suddenly found they have to pay 42.7 per cent tax, and have started exiting. I had put a question when I was discussing about the Budget. Why is the market crashing? Why is the stock market crashing? Here is the answer. I didn’t get the answer during that time. This has brought crash in the stock market. Many Indian businessmen are moving out to low tax haven countries like Singapore, Dubai and some other countries. Corporate promoters would keep profits in companies instead of distributing them as dividends that are highly taxed because the policy is anti-dividend today.
India’s history of tax reforms - since the time of Dr. Manmohan Singh, when he was the Finance Minister – revolved around making rates more reasonable and reducing the scope of arbitrage. After zero tax for those earning up to Rs.5 lakh, the tax rate jumps to 20.8 per cent. For those whose income is even a few lakh over five lakhs, they would find ways to try and lower their taxable income to below Rs.5 lakh. Study shows that authoritatively if there is one percentage point cut in the average tax rate, compliance increases by over six percentage points.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Shri Mahtab, ten minutes time has been given.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : Madam, I have just completed 12 minutes to be specific.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: We have no time. At 5 o’ clock, the reply has to start. There are many Members to speak.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : Please give me five minutes.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: One minute.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : A simple calculation can throw some light. Madam, 81,344 individuals reported earnings of more than Rs.1 crore in the financial year 2017. Madam, 4.5 to 5 million go abroad on holiday every year. A research agency estimates the number of those earning over Rs.1 crore at around 6.4 lakh in the financial year 2016, and those earning between Rs.50 to Rs.100 lakh at 11.6 lakh. Yet, 1.4 lakh persons have declared this to be their income in the financial year 2016. Yes, the number of individual tax filers rose from 42.9 million in 2015-16 to 64.3 million in 2017-18. Personal tax collections have risen. Now, transactions are being brought under tax withholding net; assault on black money is going on. Attempt is being made to move towards cashless economy.
I come to the total indirect tax collections, which is estimated to be Rs.11,19,247 crore in 2019.20. The Government has estimated to raise Rs. 6,63,344 crore from GST.
Madam, I am coming to my last point. I am not going into the details of the indirect tax. However, I would like to know from the Government that when this tendency to levy cess is going to have a sunset clause. A cess is levied on the tax payable and not on the taxable income, in a sense, for the tax payers, it is equivalent to a surcharge on tax. We have infrastructure cess on motor vehicles, clean environment cess, Krishi Kalyan Cess for improvement of agriculture etc. and education cess. It was an older regime which had started cess since 2004 and it is getting mounted. All the cesses are credited to the Consolidated Fund of India to meet specific socio-economic goals. A cess is preferred over a tax. In this Budget, 4 per cent health and education cess has been announced which incorporates the previous 3 per cent of education cess as well as an additional one per cent to provide health facilities to rural families.
The data show that when tax proceeds increase, the cess collected also rises.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Shri Ritesh Pandey.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : Madam, let me complete. It will take hardly two minutes. You did not give me five minutes.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: I did give you five minutes. There are many Members after you who have to speak.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : The data show that when tax proceeds increase, the cess collected also rises. From the inception of the education cess since 2004 till 2019, the total proceeds have been Rs. 4,25,795.81 crore, but it is more shocking that this fund has remained dormant as of March, 2018. We cannot say that till 2014, the funds remained dormant but till 2018 also, the funds remained dormant.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Bhartruhari ji, you have made your point. Now, Mr. Pandey.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : We need to know why the funds remained dormant for such a long time since a cess is introduced with a specific purpose.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Mahtab, 18-20 minutes have already passed. Let Mr. Pandey take over because there are many Members who have to speak.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : From 2004-19, around Rs. 5 lakh crore is lying dormant with the Government. At least, they have to answer.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: It has already come on record. Nothing will go on record now.
…(Interruptions)…* श्री रितेश पाण्डेय (अम्बेडकर नगर): महोदया, मैं फाइनेंस बिल पर हो रही चर्चा में भाग लेने के लिए खड़ा हुआ हूं । सत्ता पक्ष के एक सदस्य ने कहा कि माननीय वित्त मंत्री ने दो घंटे के भाषण में पानी तक नहीं पिया । इसका बहुत सीधा जवाब है और मुझसे वरिष्ठ हैं, इसलिए बुरा नहीं मानेंगे । माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी ने पानी इसलिए नहीं पिया, क्योंकि टैक्स के भाषण में उन्होंने किसानों और गरीबों का …* , इसलिए उनसे पानी नहीं पिया गया ।
HON. CHAIRPERSON : This will not go on record.
…(Interruptions)…* माननीय सभापति : यह बात रिकार्ड में नहीं जाएगी, ऐसा मैंने बोल दिया है । आप बैठ जाएं ।
…(व्यवधान)
श्री रितेश पाण्डेय : सभापति जी, मैं यह बात इसलिए कह रहा हूं क्योंकि यह जो दो परसेंट टीडीएस का सरचार्ज लगाया गया है, यह पूरी तरह से किसान विरोधी है । इसके लिए मैं एक छोटा-सा उदाहरण देना चाहूंगा । अगर मेरे क्षेत्र अम्बेडकर नगर को ही ले लिया जाए, वहां एक आढ़तिया तीस किसानों से एक हजार बोरी चार हजार के रेट से यदि खरीदता है, तो मान्यवर एक हजार बोरी चना सीधे-सीधे चालीस लाख रुपये का होगा । यह एक दिन की खरीद है । यदि आप 120 दिनों का पीक सीजन लेते हैं, तो 120 दिनों में यह हिसाब करोड़ रुपयों में चला जाता है । यह सारा का सारा पैसा किसानों को नकद में दिया जाता है । जब नकदी के ऊपर दो परसेंट टीडीएस चार्ज किया जाएगा, तो जायज बात है कि आढ़ती इसका पूरा का पूरा नुकसान किसानों पर डालेगा और किसानों से कटौती करेगा और किसानों का सामान सस्ते में खरीदने का काम करेगा । यह बहुत बड़ा किसान विरोधी कदम है ।
आजकल किसान खेती में बिल्कुल पैसे नहीं कमा पाता है । आज आप पूर्वी उत्तर प्रदेश में कहीं पर भी चले जाइए, सभी ने अपने-अपने घरों में बकरियाँ या भैंस या गाय पाल रखी हैं ताकि वे उससे कुछ धन कमा सकें । गाय, बकरी और भैंस के खुले बाजारों में जाइए, वहाँ नकदी में खरीद होती है । जितनी भी बड़ी-बड़ी कम्पनियाँ हैं, जो इन जानवरों की खरीद करती हैं, भले ही उनके पास रजिस्टर्ड ट्रेडर्स होते हैं, उन ट्रेडर्स को तो वे आरटीजीएस से पैसे देती हैं, लेकिन यही ट्रेडर्स जब एक हजार से पन्द्रह सौ भैंसें खरीदते हैं, तो वे करोड़ों रुपये किसानों को सीधे देते हैं । आप इस पर भी टीडीएस का दो पर्सेंट सरचार्ज लगाएंगे । आप बताइए, आप किसानों का क्या हाल करेंगे? मेरा मानना है कि दो पर्सेंट टीडीएस का सरचार्ज बेबुनियाद है और किसान विरोधी है । यह पूरी तरह से किसानों को और दबाने के लिए बनाया गया है । वित्त मंत्री जी से मेरा निवेदन है कि इसको हटाना बेहद जरूरी है ।
यह दो पर्सेंट का सरचार्ज 194 N के रूप में टीडीएस में आया है । मैं इसको भी रेकॉर्ड पर डालना चाहता हूँ । मेरा निवेदन है, यहाँ पर आदरणीय एमओएस बैठे हैं, मैं उनसे निवेदन करूँगा कि वे इस पर जरूर ध्यान दें । अभी आदरणीय महताब जी ने बड़े ही विस्तार से उस पर चर्चा की थी । मैंने अभी गरीबों की बात की । अब हम लोग थोड़ा हाई नेट-वर्थ इंडिविजुअल्स की भी बात कर लें ।
Madam, surcharge on annual income between Rs.2 crore and Rs.5 crore has been increased to 25 per cent and now the tax has gone up to 39 per cent which previously was 35.88 per cent. Mr. Mahtab said this and I fully agree with him. I am not going to shed too much light on this but it is certainly going to result in a brain drain from this country. When you have a tax burden of 42 per cent and 39 per cent on salaried people who provide money to the economy and enable it to move forward by giving huge amounts of money in the form of taxes, do you think they will stay in this country given the fact that we do not have even fresh air in the country? The quality of air, the quality of life is terrible. That being the case, how do you expect these individuals to pay such high taxes and stay in this country? So, my appeal to the hon. Minister of State for Finance is to also look into this.
I would refer to the Laffer Curve of taxation which shows that there is an optimum level of tax that you have to put. If you charge lower, there will be not be enough tax. But if you charge higher, you will have people avoiding the tax bracket by evading taxes. When you charge tax up to 42 per cent, all these people who fall into this bracket are rich enough to employ the right kind of lawyers, the right kind of Chartered Accountants who will find loopholes to get away from it.
Clause 8 of the Bill seeks to amend Section 13A of the Income Tax Act. There is capital gains tax which has been exempted on political parties. Income from voluntary contributions will not come under this. Madam, there is a provision that has been made which allows the Government to even take money through other digital means. So, in the future, you are opening it up for blockchain also to give money to political parties which will not be traceable. So, what the Government is trying to do here is trying to cover the money that comes in the form of donations. This is a serious flaw and it has to be looked into.
I thank you for allowing me to speak here. I will finish with what I said in my speech the other day कि यह सरकार किसान विरोधी है और इस सरकार ने किसानों के हित में कोई डिसीजन नहीं लिया है । इसलिए यह सरकार किसानों के लिए बेसुध और बंजर साबित हो रही है । आपने मुझे इस विषय पर यहाँ बोलने का मौका दिया, आपका बहुत-बहुत धन्यवाद ।
डॉ. संजय जायसवाल (पश्चिम चम्पारण): माननीय सभापति महोदया, मेरी पार्टी को दो घंटे का टाइम एलॉट है और अभी तक केवल 30 मिनट हुए हैं ।
अपनी पार्टी की तरफ से मुझे फाइनेंस बिल 2019-20 पर बोलने का मौका मिला है । महोदया, भारतीय महिलाओं में एक बहुत बड़ी खासियत होती है । महिलाएँ अपने कैरियर में कितनी भी आगे चली जाएँ, पर वे अपना घर अच्छी तरह से चलाना कभी नहीं भूलती हैं । मैं माननीया मंत्री श्रीमती निर्मला सीतारमण जी को बहुत-बहुत बधाई दूँगा कि उन्होंने बढ़िया तरीके से देश चलाने के लिए यह वित्त (संख्यांक 2) विधेयक, 2019 के प्रावधान आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 एवं अन्य विधानों में संशोधन किये हैं और उससे अपने देश की तिजोरी बहुत ही कायदे से भरी है ।
इसके साथ ही भारत को 5 लाख करोड़ डॉलर की अर्थव्यवस्था बनाने के लिए बहुत ही मज़बूत औद्योगीकरण की नींव रखी है ।
महोदया, जिस प्रकार से विभिन्न सामानों पर आयात कर लगाया गया है, हमारे पिछले एक वक्ता एतराज़ कर रहे थे कि इतने टैक्सेज़ क्यों लगे हुए हैं । ये टैक्सेज़ लगने ही चाहिए क्योंकि हमारा लक्ष्य ‘मेक इन इंडिया’ है । अगर ‘मेक इन इंडिया’ को सक्सेसफुल बनाना है तो हर हालत में हमें बाहर से आने वाले सामान पर टैक्स लगाना होगा, जिससे हम दस वर्षों में विश्व के प्रथम तीन औद्योगिक देशों में आ सकें और हम आएंगे, इसका भी मुझे पूरा विश्वास है ।
इस फाइनेंस बिल के माध्यम से बिना किसी को कष्ट दिए हुए इतना टैक्स जमा किया जा रहा है, जिससे हमारे यहां के जो गरीब, मज़दूर और किसान हैं, उनको मिनिमम सहूलियतें बहुत ही अच्छे से दी जा सकें, इसकी पूरी तैयारी हो रही है । यह तब ही हो सकता है, जब देश में एक गरीब का बेटा प्रधान मंत्री श्री नरेन्द्र मोदी जी के रूप में सत्ता के शीर्ष पर बैठता है और उसका एकमात्र लक्ष्य है कि भारत का प्रत्येक नागरिक अपने स्वाभिमान के साथ ज़िंदा रह सके, स्वाभिमान के साथ अपने परिवार का पालन कर सके । यह सोच केवल मोदी जी की हो सकती है ।
16.16 hrs (Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab in the Chair) मैं कभी-कभी सोचता हूं कि मोदी जी का जो मूल मंत्र है, ‘सबका साथ, सबका विकास, सबका विश्वास’ इससे किसी को क्या तकलीफ होती है । मुझे ध्यान आता है कि वर्ष 2014 में जब चुनाव चल रहा था, तब माननीय मोदी जी ने एक और बात कही थी - न खाऊंगा और न खाने दूंगा । इस पर हमारे विरोधी दल ज़्यादा शोर नहीं मचाते, क्योंकि वे जानते हैं कि जनता ने इनको हमेशा खाने का मौका देने से अब महरूम कर के रख दिया है, लेकिन एक बात जो मोदी जी नहीं बोलते हैं, जिससे हमारे विरोधी दलों को सबसे ज़्यादा कष्ट होता है, वह बात है - न खाऊंगा, न खाने दूंगा और जिसने पहले खाया है, उसको पचाने भी नहीं दूंगा, यही हमारे विरोधियों को सबसे ज़्यादा कष्ट देता है ।
महोदय, नोटबंदी, इनसॉलवेंसी एंड बैंकरप्ट्सी कोड, वर्ष 2011 से इनकम टैक्स का सर्वे, बेनामी संपत्ति कानून, काला धन और कर आरोपण अधिनियम, देश के आरोपित अफसरों का ज़बरदस्ती रिटायरमेंट, ये सारे मोदी सरकार के ऐसे काला धन विरोधी फैसले हैं, जो हमारे विरोधी दलों के पेट में दर्द होने के लिए मजबूर कर देता है । आज हमारे विरोधी दल के नेता बोल रहे थे, उन्होंने कह दिया कि फाइनेंस बिल पर लोक सभा अध्यक्ष की रूलिंग डैरोगेट्री हो रही है । माननीय वित्त मंत्री ने जब संशोधन प्रस्ताव किया तो माननीय सदस्य ने कहा कि यह लोक सभा का अपमान है, इतनी देर में इतने संशोधन क्यों दिए जाते हैं । यहां तक कि विरोधी दल के वे नेता जब राष्ट्रपति जी के अभिभाषण पर धन्यवाद प्रस्ताव पर बोल रहे थे तो बार-बार पूछ रहे थे कि उनके बगल के दो लोग जेल क्यों नहीं जा रहे हैं । मैं स्पेसिफिक नाम नहीं लेना चाहता हूं । समझने के लिए तो सब समझ गए हैं ।
वित्त मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री तथा कारपोरेट कार्य मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री (श्री अनुराग सिंह ठाकुर): आप विपक्ष के नेता बोल सकते हैं । …(व्यवधान)
डॉ. संजय जायसवाल : मैं विपक्ष के नेता नहीं बोल सकता हूं, उससे मैं टैक्निकली फंस जाऊंगा । मैं उनको यह विश्वास दिलाना चाहता हूं कि भारतीय कानून में इतनी अधीरता बहुत अच्छी बात नहीं है । भारत का कानून ऐसा है कि हमारे देश के एक पूर्व प्रधान मंत्री की हत्या हो गई और 21 वर्ष तक यही तय होता रहा कि हत्यारों को फांसी दी जाए या आजीवन कारावास दिया जाए । आपके नेता जेल में नहीं हैं, पर बेल पर हैं । आप इससे निश्चिंत रहिए, भारत की न्यायपालिका में देर है, अंधेर नहीं है । आपकी मनोकामना ज़रूर पूरी होगी, इसका हम लोगों को भी आप ही की तरह पूरा विश्वास है । उस दिन बार-बार वे यही प्रश्न उठा रहे थे ।
महोदय, अगर ईमानदार लोगों की बात की जाए तो यह सरकार जो टैक्स रिफॅर्म्स लेकर आई है, वह ईमानदार लोगों के लिए किसी ईश्वरीय आर्शीवाद से कम नहीं है । इस देश में पुरानी सरकार के समय आम नागरिक बिना चढ़ावा चढ़ाए अपना इनकम टैक्स रिफंड नहीं ले पाता था । वह आज आश्चर्य करता है, जब उसका इनकम टैक्म रिफंड, जीएसटी रिफंड, उसके बैंक अकाउंट में चला आता है । इससे उसे बहुत आश्चर्य होता है कि मोदी जी ने यह क्या कमाल कर दिया । दो साल पहले जब ‘वन नेशन, वन टैक्स’ के तहत जीएसटी आया तो आप याद कीजिए कि उस पर बहुत लोगों को एतराज़ था, उनको एतराज इसलिए था, क्योंकि पुरानी सरकार ने भ्रष्टाचार को शिष्टाचार बना दिया था ।
उन लोगों को लगता था कि हम ईमानदारी से टैक्स भी देंगे और विभागों को चढ़ावा भी चढ़ाना पड़ेगा । लेकिन जब उन्होंने मोदी सरकार का कार्य देखा और यह देखा कि ईमानदारी से इनकम टैक्स और जी.एस.टी. भरने पर किसी विभाग से उनको कोई तकलीफ नहीं होती है तो वे सब आज खुशी-खुशी भारत सरकार के साथ हो गए हैं, जिसका नतीजा है कि वर्ष 2019 का चुनाव हम लोगों ने इतने बड़े मेंडेट के साथ जीता है । इस बार नये फाइनेंस बिल का प्रोविजन आया है । उसमें इलैक्ट्रोनिक माध्यम से फेसलैस आकलन की इतनी बड़ी योजना है कि कौन करदाता है, विभाग का कौन अफसर डील करेगा, यह किसी को पता नहीं चलेगा । यह फेसलैस इण्टरफेस होने से हमेशा के लिए विभागों में भ्रष्टाचार समाप्त हो जाएगा ।
महोदय, माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी ने अपने भाषण की शुरुआत देश के करदाताओं का धन्यवाद देने के साथ की । मोदी जी का विज़न बिल्कुल साफ है । जनता ने उनको इतना बड़ा ऐतिहासिक बहुमत दिया है । हर नागरिक को उसके हिसाब से अच्छी सुविधा मिले, इसीलिए यह फाइनेंशियल बिल समाज को तीन दृष्टिकोणों से देखता है । पहला, अगर आप बहुत अमीर हैं तो आपको कुछ ज्यादा टैक्स देना ही पड़ेगा, क्योंकि आप जो भी कमाते हैं, इसी समाज से कमाते हैं तो समाज के छोटे तत्वों के प्रति आपकी जिम्मेदारी है । इसीलिए उस पर ज्यादा टैक्स है । अगर आप कुछ गलत कर रहे हैं, तो उसमें जेल जाने का भी प्रावधान है । अगर पचास करोड़ से ऊपर वाले कैश ट्रांजेक्शन करेंगे, तो जेल जाने का प्रावधान है । उसी तरह से कैश निकासी के प्रावधान पर कुछ लोगों को बहुत ऐतराज है । कुछ लोगों के धंधे ऐसे हैं, जो कैश से चलते हैं । वे बात तो किसानों की कर रहे थे, लेकिन अपना धंधा बताना भूल गए, जिसमें केवल कैश ही चलता है ।
दूसरा, अगर आम मध्यम वर्ग के हैं या साधारण अमीर हैं तो ईमानदारी से टैक्स भरिए । हम लोगों ने 400 करोड़ रुपये तक के लिए 25 परसेंट टैक्स कारोबार के लिए रखा है, जिससे भारत का मेक इन इण्डिया का प्रोजेक्ट पूरा हो सके । इसी के साथ स्टार्ट अप इण्डिया, हाउसिंग लोन में रिबेट्स, इलैक्ट्रिक व्हिकल्स में फायदा आदि । पिछली बार फरवरी, 2019 के इसी साल के बजट में कई सारे टैक्स रिबेट मिले हैं, उसको भी देखने का काम है ।
तीसरा हमारा तबका वह है, जिसकी कमाई 5 लाख रुपये से कम है तो उसका कोई इनकम टैक्स नहीं लगेगा । अगर आप गरीब हैं तो सरकार आपको सारी सुविधाएं इसी टैक्स के माध्यम से मुहैया कराएगी । महोदय, यह सोच भाजपा के हर कार्यकर्ता की है, क्योंकि भाजपा का हर कार्यकर्ता पण्डिल दीनदयाल उपाध्याय के अन्त्योदय सिद्धांत के आधार पर ही इस दल को ज्वॉइन करता है ।
माननीय प्रधान मंत्री श्री नरेन्द्र मोदी जी जो 100 वर्ष पहले माननीय विवेकानन्द जी ने भविष्यवाणी की थी कि भारत विश्व गुरु बनेगा, उसको आगे बढ़ाने के लिए यह सारा कार्य कर रहे हैं । मैं उनको बहुत-बहुत बधाई देता हूं । माननीय सीतारमण जी को बहुत-बहुत बधाई देता हूं । मेरे मित्र श्री अनुराग ठाकुर जी को भी बहुत-बहुत बधाई देता हूं कि उन्होंने इतना बढ़िया बजट दिया है । मैं इस फाइनेंस बिल 2019-20 का पूर्ण समर्थन करता हूं । बहुत धन्यवाद ।
DR. G. RANJITH REDDY (CHEVELLA): Hon. Chairperson, Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity. I would like to remind this House that the hon. Prime Minister, after getting the first mandate, had said that the aspirations of the States would be taken care of. The other day, the hon. Finance Minister in her address also said that the dynamics of the Centre and States will be rejuvenated. But we could not see any of these things in the Budget.
The people of Telangana are deeply anguished because there is no inclination for Telangana in the Budget which was presented in this House. Whether it is the Central Government or the State Government, the focus is to develop social security, infrastructure, and the rural economy. If we look into all these aspects, the hon. Finance Minister has allocated Rs. 10,000 crore for pensions by giving Rs. 200 per head per month. Our hon. Chief Minister, who has a very big heart, has allocated Rs. 11,000 crore for a small State like Telangana. He has given Rs. 2,016 for old age persons and Rs. 3,016 for differently abled persons. This is how a commitment has to be fulfilled. Out of Rs. 11,483 crore which were spent on pensions, the Government of India has given only Rs. 203 crore.
When it comes to infrastructure development, Har Ghar Jal is a very good project which is being taken up by the Central Government. But the hon. Finance Minister has allocated only Rs. 10,000 crore after identifying 260 districts in a country, whereas my hon. Chief Minister, who has a very big heart, has allocated Rs. 40,000 crore and he has finished giving piped drinking water to each and every household.
You need a big heart and commitment to come up with projects like this. Mission Kakatiya helps in rejuvenating all the tanks and lakes. These two iconic projects of the State of Telangana were highly appreciated by the NITI Aayog, which is a pet project of the Centre. NITI Aayog has recommended Rs.24,000 crore for the State of Telangana, but not a single rupee has been given. I would request the hon. Finance Minister to look into this.
So far as the Kaleshwaram Project is concerned, our hon. Chief Minister has allocated Rs.70,000 crore for this project. We were requesting that a national status be given to this project but it was not agreed to. Our Chief Minister was kind enough to dedicate this project to the Centre. I would request the hon. Finance Minister to consider giving national status to at least the Palamuru Rangareddy project, which is going to come up soon.
As a small State, we have limitations of our own Budget. We should not be deprived of the allocations that we are asking from the Centre in the form of help to a newly formed State. We have a young Minister of State sitting here. I wish to propose that whichever State performs best in the coming year, at least it should be identified and given special development schemes.
I feel Telangana was the best performing State last year. We have spent almost Rs.2 lakh crore each on the welfare schemes and development schemes. If such young States are considered as showcase States, the target of the Finance Minister to reach the five trillion dollar mark, which is our aim also, will definitely be achieved.
Under the housing scheme of Telangna, 1.95 crore houses are being planned for poor. I keep repeating that our Chief Minister has a big heart. To uphold the dignity of the poor, he has come up with a 570 square feet Double Bedroom Housing Scheme - with two bed rooms, one toilet, one kitchen and a separate master bed room - for the poor. That should be the commitment of a Chief Minister. I would request that the criteria may be relaxed.
With regard to the Prime Minister Gram Sadak Yojana, which envisages to consolidate 1,25,000 Km of road length in the States, money is lying idle with the executing agency. I would request the Finance Minister to look into this.
When it comes to the surcharge in income tax or when cess on petrol or diesel is increased, the excise duty is supposed to come to the State, but it is not being considered.
The tax net was increased from Rs.250 crore to Rs.400 crore. It has come down from 30 per cent to 25 per cent. I appreciate this but I would request the Finance Minister to look into the other aspects also. A company which has a bigger turnover may have less profit. They are being forced to pay 30 per cent tax, whereas a company with a little turnover is being given exemption. I feel that instead of turnover, profit has to be considered while finalising the tax net.
It is not an exaggeration when I say that experts in many channels said that all the schemes announced by the Finance Minister have already been implemented in Telangana; be it PM-KISAN, which is a copy of Rythu Bandhu scheme or Har Ghar Jal Yojana, which is a copy of Mission Bhagiratha, and the list goes on.
In terms of allocation, Telangana has been asking thousands of crores, whereas we have got just Rs.280 crore for the IIT, Hyderabad, Rs.120 crore for the Phase-II Outer Ring Road, and only Rs.8 crore for the tribal university. There is no mention about the Kaleshwaram or any of our iconic projects. I would request the hon. Finance Minister to consider the Regional Ring Road proposals also.
With these words, I hope the Finance Minister will give a serious thought to what I have mentioned and take corrective steps in a proper perspective for a better India. Thank you very much, Sir, for giving me this opportunity.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : The situation here is, we have another twelve Members to speak. By 6 o’clock the discussion has to conclude. I am very poor in mathematics, but I think five minutes to each Member would suffice.
SHRIMATI SUPRIYA SADANAND SULE (BARAMATI): Thank you, Sir. I have been listening to this debate; it has been an interesting debate because from our side, hon. Members are talking on the Finance Bill, but the two hon. Members from the Treasury Benches have only tried to explain to us about how corruption has happened and how they are going to react to it. It is actually surprising that they have conveniently forgot the history and the continuous amount of work that several Finance Ministers have done for decades before.
I would just like to remind them that 1991 was really the first time the economy opened up under the leadership of hon. Prime Minister, late Shri P.V. Narasimha Rao Ji and former hon. Finance Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh Ji and that was really the game-changer of India’s economy.
I was listening to Dr. Jaiswal when he was speaking. It was a very interesting comment that he made about several allegations that people make. I would just like to remind him and Shri Dubey who both spoke a lot about PMLA. It is a just gentle reminder. They have not taken the high morality of eradicating corruption from this country. It is just a gentle reminder to both of them, very humbly, that PMLA was first brought in by our Government and not by their Government. We were all a part of this House. I do not make it personal. But I do remember the speeches that all of them had made. So, I think, lets stick to why we are all here. Clearly, the markets have not realised, they keep talking about. I think in the last five years under this Government, the markets were really booming. So, that was really a big plus point for them. But I would like to gently remind them that this time when the Budget was happening here, the whole day and a week after that, the entire market had collapsed and that shows that this is not a very flattering Budget. It is a signal to this Government that it is not as good as they are thinking in a very insulated manner here.
We were all saying that the numbers were varying in the Budget and in the Appropriation Bill. The hon. Finance Minister said that the Economic Survey is at arm’s length. I am not sure what this arm is? It is because I was under the impression, with my little financial knowledge, that the Finance Ministry’s arm only makes the Economic Survey. So, I really do not know as to how the Economic Survey can be at an arm’s length.
Another point which they have talked about is the high morality. They really want to make a change and clean up the system, which I am very happy about and we welcome it. I think the whole House would want this change. I would like to ask one pointed question to the hon. Finance Minister. In the case of IL&FS, the whistle-blower was nearly put in jail. So, here is somebody who is contributing to improve the situation. The IL&FS is nobody’s personal property. It is owned by the Government and by the common man. So, when we are making all these tax reforms and cleaning the system, then what is this Government going to do because that person may not be in jail now, but the charges are not completely dropped? So, you have to make sure that there is a whistle-blower system where they are completely safe and it is not misused by any Government – it does not matter whether they are sitting on this side or that side.
They are talking about high morality of several things and a lot of allegations were thrown on our side of the Government. I just humbly like to ask this Government about the Panama Papers. We have seen that Mr. Cameroon resigned for it. Mr. Nawaz Sharif also had to go to jail. Pakistan is our neighbour, with whom we are having so many challenges and nobody wants to talk peace with them. So, what is this Government doing, considering that you are looking at cleaning-up the system? I am not sure of these documents. I am not making any allegations. If they could kindly see what they are doing about the Panama Papers.
I would like to explain, in short, the points which you have mentioned. I would just quickly reiterate about cess and tax. The cess is something that the Central Government keeps and the tax is something which they share. But whatever a little knowledge that we are getting from the Media and from reading papers and reports is that the health cess and education cess seems to be jumbled. You have made this point. When there is so much money lying around, why is it not getting utilised? Sir, even I would like to point out the point of CAMPA and USOF. Here we are all struggling for money in our constituency, no matter in which side you are sitting on for connectivity. So, why this money is not getting utilised? It is the same point, Sir, when you spoke about. I would like to reiterate it and I have a pointed question. Are you keeping this money only to manage the Fiscal deficit? What is it for? Why are you not giving it to the States and why is it not going where it should? I would like to second Shri Mahtab Ji on this and wish to have more clarification on this.
Another quick point is about SEBI and Income Tax. There are several amendments. I remember Shri Chidambaram Ji was the hon. Finance Minister at that time. That was the first time we brought Direct Taxes Code which was brought in by the UPA, just to simplify tax. Like GST, as much credit as they would like to take, it is our Bill. We are happy and we supported it wholeheartedly when this Government brought it. But now there is another committee. I would like to quote Shri Yashwant Sinha Ji because, I think, he was the head of the committee then, when he talked about simplifying tax codes. Now, this Government has another committee. What is done with the old report? So, Shri Yashwant Sinha Ji’s work is going to go down the drain. So, why are we not looking at simplifying taxes instead of keep changing it? The direct tax code came during the UPA. We do not want so many compliances. This Government talks about ‘Maximum Governance and Minimum Government.’ In that case, if you complicate taxes by bringing in so many amendments, how is it going to work? The IO and AO officers are all just going to get confused and people are actually harassed several times. So, I would urge this Government to re-consider. Even I know they do not like a lot of things UPA did but there are a lot of good things that they had done in that decade. So, instead of wasting time and doing one more Committee, why do you not relook into what Mr. Yashwant Sinha Ji’s committee did? It may help.
The NBFCs and the new regulator is a welcome step. I do not think anybody objects to it but justice delayed is justice denied. For six years, they have been in power. Why have they not looked into all this? Now that you are cleaning up and it starts today, what would happen to the millions of people who have got affected? What are they going to do about all that? So, they need to give us a clear answer.
As regards RBI as a regulator, the NFRA already does this. So, will there be a conflict between RBI powers and NFRA powers? There has to be more clarity from this Government. They should tell us how they are going to handle this.
Mahtab Ji, you talked about corporate tax. I have a slightly different view about high tax. The rich are getting taxed. I am not objecting to it at all. I am a little socialist in this point of view. I think this debate is about disagreement. …(Interruptions). I am not yielding. We were all in this House when the 2014 Budget was presented. I still remember Arun Jaitley Ji talked about in the 2014 Budget about a flat rate of 25 per cent across the board. I am with you in this that that is a commitment that this Government had made. It is not about rich and poor, but it is about generating wealth and giving it back to our people for nation building. So, if that 25 per cent commitment is taken, it would be wonderful.
I would just like to make two short points which Shri Jaiswal made. He talked very highly about this Government’s performance. There are two clarifications I would like to ask. The Minister should reply on his behalf because his colleague has spoken.
The media report says that two lakh people, who are high net worth individuals, have left this country in the last five years. Is that true? If it is true, why are these high net worth individuals leaving this country? How are we going to stop them? It is not just about taxes but it is even about the talent.
Dr. Jaiswal also talked about the rate of interest which is coming. He said the collections are wonderful. It all sounds great but the GST collections are anyway down. The rate of interest on delayed refunds is 12 to 18 per cent. When the Government gives it back to us, it is at 6 per cent. I do not know which numbers he was talking about. You cannot look at the whole Finance Bill in isolation. It has to be looked at holistically in the larger interest to make our economy grow, which unfortunately is slowing.
I would just like to finish by quoting Benjamin Franklin who is one of the founding fathers of the USA. He said, “In this world, nothing is said to be certain except death and taxes’. I would urge this Government to simplify all the tax proposals and make life easier. I am sure if taxes are easier, India can be a 5 trillion dollar economy. We would support them if it is in the interest of making 10 trillion dollar economy. It is always a contribution that everybody makes. Tax plays a huge role in India’s growth. So, I would say that let us be a progressive country, a pragmatic country and build a good nation together.
SHRI KESINENI SRINIVAS (VIJAYAWADA): Sir, I thank you for giving me this opportunity.
I rise to oppose the Finance Bill, 2019. Once again, the Budget 2019-20 has let down the aspirations of the people of Andhra Pradesh. There are a lot of issues that the State is facing since bifurcation. There are a lot of issues relating to AP Reorganisation Act also.
In the last five years, only Rs. 1500 crore have been given for our State Capital, Amravati, as against Rs.16000 crore which was mentioned in the Reorganisation Act. We have to build our Capital. This amount of Rs.16000 crore was promised leaving the land part. Now only Rs.1500 crore have been allotted to us in the last five years. There is no mention about it in the present Budget.
As regards Polavaram project which is the lifeline project of Andhra Pradesh what has been allocated till now is only Rs. 6700 crore out of nearly Rs.55000 crore. There is no mention of this project in the Budget. The AP Reorganisation Act talked about metro for Vijaywada city and Vizag city but there is no mention of it in the Budget.
As regards 11 educational institutions which are mentioned in the AP Reorganisation Act, Rs. 12000 crore were to be sanctioned for them. The work has started but only Rs.845 crore have been sanctioned till today. There is no mention of this also in the present Budget.
Sir, there is no mention of the Revenue deficit in the Union Budget of 2019. There was a Revenue deficit of Rs. 16,000 crore when the State of Andhra Pradesh was bifurcated and it was mentioned in the Andhra Pradesh Re-organisation Act that this amount would be given to the State of Andhra Pradesh. A sum of only Rs. 4000 crore was given in the last Budget. But there is no mention of it in this Budget. Moreover, only a sum of Rs. 21,000 crore has been allocated to the State of Andhra Pradesh which is a very meagre amount.
Sir, I have some concerns with regard to the Finance Bill, 2019. The Finance Bill proposes to charge income tax at 25 per cent for the companies with an annual turn over of less than 400 crore. While welcoming this measure, I would like to submit to the Government that bulk of the MSME entities and partnership firms are still charged income tax at 30 per cent, which I feel is discriminatory in nature. Maximum rate should be the same across all entities. Hence, I would like to request the hon. Minister to look into this matter and bring partnership firms in the 25 per cent tax rate category.
I welcome the measure proposed in the Budget to encourage digital mode of payments. However, looking at the finer points, it appears that the merchant establishments with an annual turnover of more than Rs. 50 crore will be spared by the banks from the cost of digital mode of receipts. Does this mean that the merchants who have below Rs. 50 crore transactions, who constitute a bulk of the trading community will continue to be charged the digital transaction fee which is about 2 per cent? The present legislation seems to be flat and, in my opinion, the small and the medium traders and their customers should be spared from this burden of paying digital transaction fee.
Sir, the other point is on the TDS on cash withdrawals exceeding Rs. 1 crore in a year. When a person, be it a company, or firm or individual withdraws money from its own account no element of income tax is involved in that transaction. Then, how can the Income Tax Department deduct tax from such cash withdrawals? Is it within the powers of the Income Tax Department to collect TDS on such cash withdrawals? Even if TDS is allowed to be deducted on cash withdrawals from banks, how come Income Tax gives credit for TDS to the person? It is because cash withdrawals are not in the nature of income as contemplated under Section 99 of the Income Tax Act. Even if these amounts were to be refunded at a later stage, there would be a huge loss of interest to the person concerned since the IT Department does not pay any interest. According to my understanding, TDS under income tax is to be at source of the income and not at the time of cash withdrawals for spending. It is most likely that TDS is effected when the money is getting credited to the account of the person. If they were to be taxed again at the time of withdrawal, then one has to pay tax two times. I would like to request the hon. Finance Minister to kindly look into this anomaly and withdraw this.
Sir, my last point is about according special category status to the State of Andhra Pradesh. This was a promise made by the former Prime Minister …* in Rajya Sabha as part of the Andhra Pradesh Re-organisation Act. Our present Chief Minister, …* when he was in Opposition, he promised to the people of Andhra Pradesh that he would get the State of Andhra Pradesh the special category status if people voted him to power. Now, the people have voted him to power and he has become the Chief Minister of the State. In his meetings with the hon. Prime Minister recently, he says that he would have to continuously ask the Government for according this special category status for the State of Andhra Pradesh. It stands as a responsibility of our hon. Chief Minister and all the 22 MPs of YSRCP for achieving the special category status for our State …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON : You do not have take the names. Names should not be there. It is otherwise a good advice.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI KESINENI SRINIVAS : Sir, I would like to urge upon the 22 MPs …(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Nothing will go on record.
(Interruptions)… * श्री सुभाष चन्द्र बहेड़िया (भीलवाड़ा): माननीय सभापति महोदय, मैं आपका धन्यवाद करता हूँ कि आपने मुझे वित्त (संख्या 2) विधेयक, 2019 पर बोलने का मौका दिया । जो वित्त विधेयक होता है, वह देश में प्रत्यक्ष और अप्रत्यक्ष कर कैसे कलेक्ट किया जाए, किस दर से कलेक्ट किया जाए, आने वाले वर्ष में क्या उसका प्रोसीजर हो, उसके लिए लाया जाता है । यह जो कर का प्रस्ताव है, आदिकाल से चला आ रहा है । एक जगह तुलसीदास जी ने बोला है कि-
बरषत हरषत लोग सब करषत लखै न कोइ ।
तुलसी प्रजा सुभाग ते भूप भानु सो होइ॥ टैक्स जो लगना चाहिए, वह सूर्य भगवान जैसे लेना चाहिए कि वह थोड़ा-थोड़ा सब जगह से सोखता है । किसी को मालूम नहीं होता कि कहाँ से कितना पानी सोख रहा है । पानी सोखने के बाद बरसात में वापस देता है ताकि आम जन उस बरसात से हर्षित होए । यह तुलसीदास जी ने बोला है ।
मान्यवर, पिछले पाँच साल में माननीय प्रधान मंत्री मोदी जी के नेतृत्व में जितने प्रत्यक्ष और अप्रत्यक्ष करों में सुधार हुए हैं, उतने सुधार शायद कभी नहीं हुए । आज उन सुधारों का परिणाम है कि ईमानदार टैक्स पेयर स्वाभिमान से जी रहा है । सरकार की करों से आमदनी भी बढ़ रही है । प्रधान मंत्री जी की सोच है कि कोई भी कर कानून इतना जटिल न बने कि ईमानदार जो करदाता है, उसको उसकी अनुपालना में परेशानी हो । उसके साथ-साथ ऐसा भी कानून बने ताकि जो कर चोरी करता है, उनके ऊपर कड़ी कार्रवाई हो । यह वित्त विधेयक इसी को दर्शाता है ।
सभापति महोदय, जो वित्त विधेयक में छूट दी गई है, उसके बारे में मेरे पूर्व वक्ताओं ने काफी कुछ बोल दिया है । कालाधन और कर आरोपण अधिनियम, 2015 में केवल रेजिडेंट ही इसमें असेसी था, नॉन रेजिडेंट नहीं । नॉन रेजिडेंट का मतलब जो पिछले साल में 180 दिन भारत में नहीं रहा, वह नॉन रेजिडेंट हो गया । अगर नॉन रेजिडेंट का विदेश में कालाधन है तो उस कानून के तहत सरकार कोई कार्रवाई नहीं कर सकती थी, लेकिन अभी परिभाषा को बदल कर उसमें नॉन रेजिडेंट को भी इनक्लूड किया । देश से बेईमानी करके कालाधन कमाकर जो बाहर भाग गए हैं, उनके ऊपर भी यह लागू हो गया है ।
कर के दायरे को बढ़ाने के लिए, जो व्यक्ति एक करोड़ रुपये से ज़्यादा बैंक में जमा कराता है या दो लाख रुपये विदेश यात्रा पर खर्च करता है या एक लाख रुपये सालाना बिजली का बिल भरता है, उनकी भले ही टैक्सेबल इनकम न हो, लेकिन सरकार ने उनके लिए रिटर्न भरना आवश्यक किया है । कोई एक करोड़ रुपये जमा कराने वाला टैक्स नहीं भर रहा है, यदि वह रिटर्न भरेगा तो उसे मालूम पड़ेगा कि क्या हो रहा है । इस तरह से जो कर चोरी करने की इच्छा रखते हैं, उनके लिए यह कानून है ।
दूसरा, कैशलैस असेसमेंट शुरू किया है । जो असेसिंग अथॉरिटी है, वे ई-मेल द्वारा असेसी को क्वेरी पूछेगी और ई-मेल से ही असेसी को रिप्लाई देना होता है । इसमें मेरा एक ही आग्रह है कि कहीं इसका मिस-यूज न हो, क्योंकि जो कर वसूल करने वाली मशीनरी है, वह तरीके सोचती है कि कैसे किस कानून का मिस-यूज किया जाए ताकि करदाता हैरेस हो । इसका मिस-यूज न हो, इसके लिए यह आवश्यक है कि इसमें पूरी सावधानी रखी जाए । एक करोड़ से ज़्यादा कैश विद्ड्रा करता है तो उसके ऊपर बैंक ने 2 परसेंट टैक्स की शुरुआत की है । यहाँ पर भी एक्चुअल प्रेक्टिकल में दिक्कत है, जहाँ पर बैंकिंग सुविधा नहीं है, जैसे मंडियों में कोई भी किसान आता है तो बैंक ट्रांसफर के ऊपर वह लेना नहीं चाहता ।
माननीय सभापति : पाँच मिनट हो चुके हैं ।
श्री सुभाष चन्द्र बहेड़िया : सभापति महोदय, पार्टी का काफी समय है । अभी तो मुझे जो बोलना है, वह मैंने बोला ही नहीं है । अभी तो शुरुआत की है ।
माननीय सभापति : आपकी पार्टी की तरफ से और भी तीन-चार मैम्बर्स बोलने के लिए हैं ।
श्री सुभाष चन्द्र बहेड़िया : दो घंटे के हिसाब से बहुत समय बाकी है । मैं अपनी सीधी बात पर आता हूँ ।
मैं भीलवाड़ा से आता हूं । भीलवाड़ा एक बहुत बड़ा सिंथेटिक वस्त्र उद्योग का शहर है । मुझे मालूम है कि जीएसटी की दर जीएसटी काउंसिल में तय होती है, लेकिन जीएसटी काउंसिल में अगर केंद्र सरकार कोई प्रपोजल ले जाती है, तो वह टर्न डाउन नहीं होता है, क्योंकि वन-थर्ड वोटिंग राइट इनके पास होता है और टू-थर्ड राज्यों के पास होता है । मेरा आपसे आग्रह है कि भीलवाड़ा में सबसे बड़ी प्रॉब्लम हो रही है, वहाँ पर करीब 5 हजार छोटे-मोटे वस्त्र बनाने वाले कारखाने हैं । उनका जो इनपुट है, उस पर 12 पर्सेंट टैक्स लग रहा है और आउटपुट पर 5 पर्सेंट टैक्स ही है । इस कारण से आईटीसी जो है, 5 हजार व्यक्तियों को रिफंड फॉर्म भरने में और उसे भेजने में सरकार को भी दिक्कत हो रही है । मेरा आग्रह है कि अगर यार्न पर ही 5 पर्सेंट जीएसटी कर दिया जाए, तो उसके कारण सरकार पर जो अननेसेसरी बर्डेन आ रहा है और जो टैक्सपेयर्स को दिक्कत हो रही है, वह भी एक तरह से कम हो जाएगी ।
मैं एक और महत्वपूर्ण चीज की ओर आपका ध्यान दिलाना चाहता हूं । एक नोटिफिकेशन 2018 में हो गया था – फार्म आईटीसी 04 का । उसको चेंज करना, अमेंडमेंट करने का नोटिफिकेशन 2018 में हो गया, लेकिन आज तक वह अमेंडमेंट पोर्टल पर नहीं डाला गया । इसके कारण जो करदाता है, वह आईटीसी 04 का फार्म नहीं भर पा रहा है । मेरा आग्रह है कि कोई भी ऐसा निर्णय हो, जिसमें फार्म भरने का या कोई सुविधा देने का, तो उसको इमीडिएट पोर्टल पर डाला जाए, ताकि करदाता समय पर अपनी जिम्मेदारी पूरी कर सकें और रिटर्न भर सकें । आज केवल उसके कारण वे रिटर्न नहीं भर पा रहे हैं । इसे भी सरकार को देखना चाहिए ।
महोदय, जैसे आईटीसी जीएसटी के अंदर जमा होती है और किसी ने गलत क्रेडिट ले ली, लेकिन उस क्रेडिट का यूज नहीं किया, फिर भी उसके ऊपर 24 पर्सेंट की पेनाल्टी लगती है, जबकि उसने उस पैसे से कुछ काम नहीं लिया । उससे गलती से टेक्निकल मिस्टेक हो गई । इस बारे में करेक्शन होनी चाहिए । अगर वह उस आईटीसी को किसी का पेमेंट करने के यूज में ले लेता है, तो उसको उसके बारे में छूट मिलनी चाहिए और उस पर टैक्स नहीं लगना चाहिए ।
इसके अलावा अब मैं अपना लास्ट पॉइंट कहूंगा । जीएसटी के अंदर, क्योंकि जीएसटी गुड्स एंड सर्विस टैक्स दोनों हैं, लेकिन आईटीसी के रिफंड में सर्विस टैक्स को परमीशन नहीं दी जाती है । जब फाइनल प्रोडक्ट बनता है, जिसमें सभी चार्जेज होते हैं, उस पर पूरा टैक्स लगता है ।
मेरा आपसे आग्रह है कि सर्विस टैक्स की जो आईटीसी जमा रहती है, उसका भी रिफंड करदाता को मिलना चाहिए ।
आपने मुझे बोलने का अवसर दिया, इसके लिए मैं आपको धन्यवाद देता हूं ।
डॉ. एस. टी. हसन (मुरादाबाद): महोदय, मैं आपके माध्यम से सरकार का ध्यान हैंडीक्राफ्ट एक्सपोर्ट के ऊपर दिलाना चाहता हूँ । मैं मुरादाबाद से आता हूँ, जो पूरी दुनिया में ब्रास सिटी के नाम से जाना जाता है । पूरे देश का तकरीबन 40 परसेंट हैंडीक्राफ्ट एक्सपोर्ट मुरादाबाद से होता है।
16.54 hrs (Hon. Speaker in the Chair) महोदय, मुरादाबाद में तकरीबन 1 हजार एक्सपोर्ट यूनिट्स हैं और 10 हजार से ज्यादा इंडस्ट्रीज हैं । मुरादाबाद शहर को इंडस्ट्रियल कॉरिडोर भी डिक्लेयर किया गया और वहाँ पर एसईजेड भी है । पूरे नॉर्दन इंडिया में एक कमिश्नर उसकी देखभाल करता है । आज के दौर में मुरादाबाद का एक्सपोर्टर और वहाँ हैंडीक्राफ्ट उद्योग से जुड़े हुए लोग, क्राफ्टमैन और आर्टिजंस बहुत बुरे हाल में हैं । वे भुखमरी के कगार पर हैं ।
महोदय, मैं आपके माध्यम से माननीय मंत्री जी का ध्यान दिलाना चाहता हूँ कि जो जीएसटी मुरादाबाद के एक्सपोर्ट के ऊपर लगाया गया है, जीएसटी रिटर्न तकरीबन 1,100 करोड़ रुपये इस वक्त बाकी है, जो मुरादाबाद के एक्सपोर्टर्स को मिलना चाहिए था । ये ऐसे एक्सपोर्टर हैं, जो तकरीबन 50 लाख या 1 करोड़ रुपये का एक्सपोर्ट करते हैं और अगर 1 साल से उनको जीएसटी रिटर्न वापस नहीं मिला है, तो वे एक्सपोर्ट कैसे करेंगे? इस कारण से बहुत से एक्सपोर्टर अपनी एक्सपोर्ट कंपनीज को बंद करने जा रहे हैं और बहुत से क्राफ्टमैन अपने कारोबार को चेंज करने जा रहे हैं ।
अध्यक्ष जी, मैं आपके माध्यम से कहना चाहता हूं कि पहले एक्सपोर्टर्स को तकरीबन 99.2 परसेंट ड्रॉबैक दिया जाता था । आज वह सिर्फ 2 परसेंट रह गया है । उसके कारण एक्सपोर्ट कम हो गया । जहां पहले मुरादाबाद 16,000 करोड़ रुपये का एक्सपोर्ट करता था, वहीं आज वह तकरीबन 5,000 करोड़ रुपये का ही एक्सपोर्ट कर रहा है । इस ड्रॉबैक को खत्म करने के साथ-साथ जी.एस.टी. की भी प्रॉब्लम है । जिस एक्सपोर्टर को जी.एस.टी. रिफण्ड नहीं हो रहा है, उसकी जबर्दस्त प्रॉब्लम उसके सामने है ।
अध्यक्ष जी, आज वहां का क्राफ्ट्समैन ऑटो रिक्शा चला रहा है और मजदूरी कर रहा है । मैं आपके माध्यम से बड़े अफसोस के साथ सरकार को कहना चाहता हूं कि हमारा यह ‘स्किल ड्रेन’ है । ये लोग नेपाल और दुबई जैसे छोटे देशों में जा रहे हैं । वहां पर हमारे एक्सपोर्टर्स शिफ्ट कर रहे हैं । अभी तक तो ‘ब्रेन ड्रेन’ होता था, पर अब ‘स्किल ड्रेन’ शुरू हो गया । इसको रोकना हमारी और सरकार की जबर्दस्त जिम्मेदारी है ।
आपके माध्यम से, मेरी यह डिमांड है । चूंकि जब सारी जी.एस.टी. वापस होती है तो फिर लगाई ही क्यों जा रही है? यह जी.एस.टी. न लगे, ऐसी कोई और सूरत निकाली जाए । इसके साथ-साथ मैं आपके माध्यम से कहना चाहता हूं कि ड्रॉबैक 10 परसेंट होना चाहिए और काँग्रेस सरकार के जमाने में जैसे इंसेंटिव मिलता था, वैसे ही 10 परसेंट कैश इंसेंटिव एक्सपोर्टर्स को मिले, ताकि ये एक्सपोर्ट्स आगे बढ़ें और देश का नाम आगे बढ़े । बहुत-बहुत शुक्रिया ।
SHRI E.T. MOHAMMED BASHEER (PONNANI): Speaker Sir, thank you for the opportunity given to me. This time, a peculiar situation is prevailing. Demands for Grants, Finance Bill and allied matters have not been vetted by the Departmentally Related Standing Committees. So, we have to be very careful about that. A meticulous scrutiny by Standing Committees has not been done. As far as these proposals are concerned, before that we have to think about tax proposals made in this Budget : direct and indirect taxes, then cess and surcharge – these are all putting additional burden on the people. Proposals like hike in the petroleum products and its impact are going to come before us. In addition to that, while going through this Finance Bill, there are some plus points also like tax exemption for affordable housing, incentive for start-ups, tax exemption for electrical vehicles, exemption for national pension system. This kind of welcome suggestions are also there.
I would like to say a very important thing with regard to 10 per cent Customs Duty on newsprint. I understand that Prof. Saugata Roy also said about that. This 10 per cent Customs Duty on newsprint has created a very difficult situation for the newspapers. Almost all the small newspapers are going to stop publishing. Not only that, as far as our democratic set up is concerned, we have to engage with the newspapers. The argument in support of this is the development of what is called indigenous production. That is good. At the same time, there is a mismatch between our local production and the demand. The only way is to depend on imports. So, I very strongly appeal that the Government should do away with this tax and this will help the very existence of our newspapers.
With regard to Direct Tax Code, it was mentioned here, while UPA was in power, we had tried for this during 2009 and 2013. Now, I would like to say that this Tax Code is very much required and it is high time to do it. There should not be any further delay in that.
I would like to say one more thing with regard to Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund. It is for giving financial assistance to kidney patients, heart patients and such chronic diseases. You are all taking maximum interest in that kind of things. Actually, under this, for one MP, maximum 35 applications will be considered in a year. It means three applications on an average in a month. We are getting a lot of applications. So, I humbly appeal to the Government to increase the allocation for this PMNRF and thus, save the poor, ill-fated patients.
17.00 hrs There are just one or two more points. Then, I am concluding.
Certain sections of people like tea, coffee, rubber and spices growers are still neglected. Their interests may also be protected.
Lastly, with regard to survey conducted in Kasaragod, the Government should take the initiative and help us.
Thank you, Sir.
SHRI P. RAVEENDRANATH KUMAR (THENI): Hon. Speaker, I am thankful to you for giving me this opportunity to speak on the Finance Bill.
On behalf of my party AIADMK, I stand here to support this Finance Bill, 2019.
The amendments proposed by our Finance Minister are with the aim of bringing fiscal stability and reforms. I appreciate our hon. Prime Minister of India, Shri Narendra Modi-ji and the hon. Finance Minister for the initiative to convert our nation into an economic power in the world, particularly in the continent of Asia.
I welcome the taxation proposals announced by the hon. Finance Minister. I also welcome the hon. Finance Minister’s quote from the Tamil Classic’s Pura Nanooru about the advice rendered by Pisirandaiyaar to the King Pandian.
Now, I would like to present the expectations of the Government of Tamil Nadu, which may be included in the Finance Bill. The Finance Bill carries the taxation proposals of the Government of India for this fiscal year. The main concern, which Tamil Nadu has been raising repeatedly is that the Central Government has been resorting to levy of cess and surcharges on various central taxes including income tax.
HON. SPEAKER: Please conclude.
SHRI P. RAVEENDRANATH KUMAR : I am just concluding, Sir.
Tamil Nadu’s share of the total GST collection in India has been around 7.4 per cent of the total collection of GST since inception. The annual SGST collection in Tamil Nadu was Rs. 34,442 core in 2016-17, which is 37 per cent. Similarly, it was Rs. 37,897 crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 45,490 crore in 2018-19. Sir, our State of Tamil Nadu stands third highest in collecting personal income tax in India after Maharashtra and Karnataka.
I register here the concerns of my State of Tamil Nadu regarding share of GST and Centrally Sponsored Schemes. I would request the hon. Finance Minister to consider clearing all dues pending for the State of Tamil Nadu, which would help our State significantly to implement various schemes.
With these words, I conclude. Thank you.
SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN (KOLLAM): Hon. Speaker, Sir, I rise here to oppose the Finance Bill (No. 2) for the financial year 2019-20.
The amount budgeted to be raised through the surcharge and cess on the direct tax side is Rs. 3 lakh crore. The total projected tax revenue is Rs. 16.5 lakh crore for 2019-20. As per the Revised Estimates of 2018-19, it is only Rs. 14.8 lakh crore.
So, the Budget for 2019-20 aspires ambitious revenue estimates based on surcharge and cess besides big disinvestment proceeds.
Now, I am coming to the points on surcharge and cess. I fully support and appreciate the imposition of super rich tax of three per cent and seven per cent. Those who are having a taxable income between Rs. 2 crore and Rs. 5 crore, will have to pay a surcharge of three per cent; and those who are having a taxable income above Rs. 5 crore, will have to pay a surcharge of seven per cent. I fully appreciate and support imposing super rich tax on the corporates and big people in the country.
But at the same time, when I am supporting it, I strongly oppose the increase in the Special Additional Excise Duty, and Road and Infrastructure Cess each by one rupee on petrol and diesel. It is putting a heavy burden on the common mass of the country. It is having a cascading effect.
Road and Infrastructure Cess, which was Rs. 8 per litre has been enhanced to Rs. 9 per litre. Similar is the case with regard to diesel also.
I would like to raise two points in this case. One is Road and Infrastructure Cess on fishing boats. Fishing industry in our country is facing a big crisis. It is an export earning industry also. How can they impose road cess on fishing vessels? Hence, I would urge upon the Government to exempt the fishing vessels from imposition of road cess of Rs. 19. Imposition of road cess on fishing vessels is illogical and unjustifiable.
Regarding surcharge and cess, 80th Constitution Amendment provides for all central taxes to be shared among the Centre and the States. That means, surcharge and cess will be in the Divisible Pool.
HON. SPEAKER: Please conclude, now.
SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN : Sir, I have got only bullet points. I am just concluding.
Till 2015-16, surcharge and cess was only five to six per cent. But it has come to more than nine per cent of the gross tax receipts. That means, it is their intention that when they are imposing surcharge and cess, the concerned States will be denied the right to have the share of the Central Tax Revenue. So, this point has to be addressed. It is unfair. It is against the basic principles of cooperative federalism.
Sir, regarding the Customs Duty on Titanium Dioxide, the KMML industry, which is in my Constituency, I appreciate that 10 per cent of the Customs Duty is maintained. I urge upon the Government to enhance it, if it is possible.
As far as cashew nut is concerned, 2.5 per cent Customs Duty is there. More than 10 lakh cashew workers are there. This industry is facing crisis with this 2.5 per cent of Customs Duty. Around 95 per cent of the workers in this cashew industry are socially backward women folk in this country. Kindly withdraw this Customs Duty also.
With these words, I conclude. Thank you very much.
SHRI VE. VAITHILINGAM (PUDUCHERRY): Thank you, Sir. The Government of Puducherry has implemented the Seventh Pay Commission recommendations to the employees including pensioners in the Union Territory of Puducherry with effect from 1st January, 2016. The revised pay is being paid from 1st September 2016 and the arrears of pay and pension, for the period from January 2016 to August 2016, which works out to Rs. 231 crore, is yet to be paid to the employees and pensioners. The Government of Puducherry has been urging the Government of India to release the Central assistance for meeting the additional financial implication arising out of the implementation of the Seventh Pay Commission recommendations.
I would like to inform the House that a few days back, to my Question, the hon. Minister of State for Home has given a reply that an amount of Rs. 1,545 crore had been allocated in the Budget Estimate of 2019-20 as Central assistance to the Puducherry Government. Actually, the amount, which was provided by the Government of India, is only a normal Central assistance given every year to U.T. of Puducherry. In the same Question, the hon. Minister had admitted that during the implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission, an amount of Rs. 367 crore was provided as additional Central assistance to Puducherry. On the same analogy, now, the Government of Puducherry is requesting for the Central assistance from the Centre.
THE MINISTER OF FINANCE AND MINISTER OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS (SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN): Thank you, Sir. Let me, first of all, thank all the Members who have participated in this discussion related to the Finance Bill. As I initiated the discussion in the morning, I had very clearly said: “At that stage, I shall not speak in detail on the Bill itself.” But I had highlighted those Acts in which amendments are being made. The Members had rightly expressed concerns in the morning that certain things may not come technically in the Finance Bill but you have kindly heard us all out and spelt out your verdict on it. The underlying point in this is that even if they are non-taxable matters but because they have very important and critical impact on the finances of the State and also finances of the economy at large, it was felt imperative – ‘imperative’ is the word which the rule allows us that the Government, if it feels that there is an imperative to bring such aspects of non-taxable matters also under the Finance Bill’s amendment, it may be permitted. You have taken a considered view on it and given us the permission to go ahead with the discussion after taking cognizance of the Members’ concerns. I am very grateful for that.
As always, let me very quickly run through the names of the Members who have participated and given very valuable suggestions. I am starting with Shri Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, Dr. Nishikant Dubey, Dr. Thamizhachi Thangapandian, Shri P.V. Midhun Reddy, Prof. Sougata Ray, Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh Alias Lalan Singh, Shri Rahul Ramesh Shewale, Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab, Shri Ritesh Pandey, Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal, Dr. G. Ranjith Reddy, Shrimati Supriya Sadanand Sule, Shri Kesineni Srinivas, Shri Subhash Chandra Baheria, Dr. S. T. Hasan, Shri E.T. Mohammed Basheer, Shri P. Raveendranath Kumar and Shri N.K. Premachandran.
There are several issues which have been raised – to all of which, I can respond, item-wise – by Members. But holistically I would like to, first of all, draw the picture of what the Finance Bill aims at. We have already set ourselves a 10-year vision; we are also setting ourselves a five-year target, all of which was explained during the Budget speech. Through the Finance Bill, essentially through the various taxation proposals that we are bringing before you, we are underlining the fact that ‘Make in India’ needs to be given greater push. That is why, when you look at the Direct Tax amendments, as I mentioned in the morning, Direct Tax amendments are looking at seven Acts, all of which are getting amended in some way or the other, which relate to reduction in corporate tax rate. In order to reduce the effective tax on corporates, it is proposed to provide the benefit of reduced corporate tax rate of 25 per cent to all companies having an annual turnover of up to Rs. 400 crore. This will cover 99.3 per cent of all the companies. All the companies, literally 99.3 per cent of them, are getting covered under the 25 per cent tax rate which was a goal set by the first Budget of our previous NDA Government led by hon. Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi. In 2014 it was promised that we will have this gliding path coming down on corporate tax rate from 30 per cent to 25 per cent. We are reaching the goal of corporate tax rate of 25 per cent. Now we have reached the goal of covering 99.3 per cent of the companies. So, it is important to make that amendment.
Incentives were being provided for purchase of electric vehicles. It is an important step towards the concern that we expressed on environment consciousness. Therefore, in order to incentivise purchase of electric vehicle by an individual, it is proposed to provide deduction of an amount, up to Rs. 1,50,000 for interest which has been paid on loans taken for purchase of electric vehicles. The loan is required to be taken on or before 31st March, 2023.
Further, many other Acts of Direct Taxes will have to be changed only because several incentives for start-ups have been announced. I would like to go through one or two of them without taking much time on this one item itself. The condition of carry forward and set off of losses in the case of eligible start-ups is proposed to be relaxed enabling them to carry forward their losses. Obviously, start-ups cannot be making profits even in the first or the second year. So, we have been considerate because this is one demand which has come from start-ups. This is one of the things we are amending. Similarly, a provision has also been allowed for exemption of capital gains arising from sale of residential property because many of the start-ups do sell their own properties which they own and invest in the business to start with. For them, we need to give that concession. So, on investment of net consideration in equity shares of eligible start-ups, it is proposed to be extended by two years. The condition of minimum holding of 50 per cent of share capital is proposed to be relaxed to 25 per cent. The restriction on transfer of computer or computer software is also proposed to be relaxed from the current five years to three years.
Like that, I can go on adding for each category. The essence of the taxation proposals which are in the Finance Bill is to promote greater ease of doing business, encouraging ‘Make in India’, and encouraging young entrepreneurs who want to do something by investing their own seed capital first. That is the drive which ‘Make in India’ requires now because there is a lot of enthusiasm among people who want to move from a salary-paying job to creating jobs for others.
‘Boost for affordable housing’ is something which I would like to underline. There is amendment again because of the incentives we want to give. In order to incentivise purchase of affordable houses, it is proposed to provide a deduction of up to Rs. 1,50,000 for interest paid on loans taken for the purchase of an affordable house. This shall be in addition to the existing interest deduction of Rs. 2,00,000. Again, for the increase of supply of affordable houses, it is proposed to relax the condition of 100 per cent profit-linked deduction to affordable housing projects also. By increasing the limit of carpet area from 30 square meters to 60 square meters in metropolitan regions and from 60 square meters to 90 square meters in non-metropolitan regions, it is also proposed to align the limit on cost of the affordable house to Rs. 45 lakh with the GST Acts also.
So, when I am talking of direct taxes, I am talking from the point of view of income and income related taxes. This will have a bearing even on the GST amendments which I will list out when I am talking about indirect taxes.
One of the major steps is that we wish India becomes a very big International Financial hub. With a view to further incentivising the International Financial Services Centre, IFSC, it is proposed to provide several direct tax incentives to an IFSC including hundred per cent profit linked deduction under the Section 80(LA) in any 10 year block within a 15 year period, exemption from dividend distribution tax about which most Members do express concern every now and then, from current and accumulated income to companies and mutual funds, exemptions on capital gain to category 3 AIFs and interest payment on loan taken from non-residents. So, this is an important thing which we want to make sure that India becomes eventually one of the biggest International Financial Service Centres. I have explained it during the presentation of the Budget that for the issue of NBFCs, to address the concern which is now very clearly voiced by very many people, we have come up with a proposal for the interest on bad and doubtful debts in the case of deposit taking NBFCs and systemically important non-deposit taking NBFCs. What is systemically important? You may ask this question later. Systemically important non-deposit taking NBFCs are nothing but those NBFCs which have more than Rs. 500 crore asset base. So, for these systemically important non-deposit taking NBFCs, they shall be charged on tax on receipt basis and not on accrual basis. This is an important change which is necessary considering the situation in which NBFCs will have to now be addressing the issues that they are facing and the challenges that they are facing. So, it is also proposed to provide that deduction of such interest and shall be allowed to the payer on actual payment. So, these are institutional and important steps. I would not take more time going into each one of them much more elaborately.
PROF. SOUGATA RAY (DUM DUM): Madam, what are you doing for ILFS? …(Interruptions)
SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: I am just coming one by one. I am not citing per company or per issue but the issue of NBFCs is being covered here.
So, for addressing the NBFCs issue majorly and in a wider context, I have put here. I am not citing individual instances of companies which have faced crisis for which the Government’s response is even otherwise available. The inter-changeablity of PAN and Aadhar also requires certain kind of amendments, as much as for pre-filling of returns.
Sir, many Members have spoken about it. I will address the issue. But one other thing which requires amendment is the issue of TDS on big cash withdrawals from bank. For withdrawals by a person or by an individual in excess of one crore rupees in a year from the bank account will be subject to two per cent TDS. Here even as I say where it is required for some kind of amendments to take place because of this, I want to assure the Members that if there are people who are tax paying citizens, who have withdrawn like this, this TDS will be adjusted with the total tax dues. So, it is not over and above what is expected to pay as tax but it is going to be reconciled with the total tax claim which can be laid on the individual. So, it is not something running parallel to it. So, if an individual has paid tax or is paying as an assessee, this two per cent will also get reconciled. But if he is not one, obviously he will have to pay the TDS.
There is then the deduction on tax by individuals or HUF. In this case again, there is also an issue of FPIs. Where you are trying to include tax deduction from HUFs and TDS, it has an impact on those FPIs who are registered as trusts.
There is an option for FPIs to register as companies. But if they registered it as a company, they do not have the problem of this new tax that we are talking about. But when it is registered as a Trust, a Trust is treated as a taxable entity, and, therefore, as an individual entity, it comes under the taxation. So, many of our officials have also been talking that such FPIs, who have registered themselves as Trusts, may consider the option of wanting to move to be registered as companies. That is something which I would like to highlight.
Similarly, there are facilities which are being extended for low cost electronic payments because digitization and less cash usage is a priority for this Government. Every attempt is being made to make people use some form of electronic payment, be it a card, be it a QR code or be it the BHIM App. In that process, it is not as if we are discouraging people from withdrawing their own cash deposited in a bank but it is more to encourage those who can use the digital and electronic payment, and thereof, obviously, the amendment will affect the Payment and Settlement Systems Act. So, that is also being listed under the direct taxation.
The other amendments are into the PMLA, the Act relating to black money. On that, I would like to assure the Members regarding the kind of amendments. In fact, I would like to mention, well before that, the number of amendments, which are coming through for the PMLA, which is of 2002 vintage. Eight are being proposed by us. Of the eight, six are only explanations to the existing clause. The clause itself is not being changed. We are only coming with explanations. These explanations are being brought into the Act because of pleading in the courts by some of those who are accused and because of some kind of a confusion or a grey area or an ambiguity which might exist. Therefore, the amendment is not amendment of the clause itself. It is more explaining the clause. So, of the eight amendments proposed under the PMLA, six of them are amendments only for additional explanations to be added.
In fact, in this context, I am very grateful that you have given me the opportunity to be able to read out some passages. But I would not spend too much time on that particular thing. Probably, I would have waited for the conclusion of my speech but then I am very grateful that you have given me permission to lay a statement describing the entire background and giving the justification for the amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which may be read as a part of my speech.
But of those eight points on which the amendments are being brought in, as I said, six are only explanation. One is deletion of a proviso, a proviso which has no purpose to be there, which was not being invoked but of course, being invoked by people who intend differently, and, therefore, that proviso is being removed.
A new proviso, which is being added, is only to make sure that where a case exists in one court and the hearings are going on there and where in a different court there could be proceedings happening, these two cannot be clubbed or brought together as one and treated as one. Therefore, that is a set of proceedings which is different. The case otherwise is going on in a different court. We have treated them separately. To that extent, the proviso is being added. Therefore, as regards PMLA, I want to be clear that the explanations which are going in, are explanations to the existing clauses, and no new clauses are being added, except for one where we are bringing a proviso. Another proviso is getting removed.
As regards indirect taxes--very quickly I will move over--there are about seven Acts which are getting amended with some amendments to seven of them. This morning I read a list of those seven. One is Customs Act where we are making sure that we have the authority to check somebody who is suspicious and even then, when they are going to be put through the x-ray, they will be put through the x-ray only after they have been taken to a Magistrate. So, it is not as if the official at the airport, who suspects somebody, does it on his own. The amendment is more to give them the power so that they can take such people before a Magistrate and say, we have strong evidence of suspicion, we seek your permission; would you allow us to do an x-ray of this individual?
So, such kind of changes are brought in. Therefore, the Customs Act changes are largely to ensure that the Customs Department does not suffer from dealing with people who have absolutely stood out there in the redline and, therefore, they have to be acted upon. The second is on the Customs tariff. That is also being amended because tariff lines for specific products will have to be brought in.
Then, of course, there are amendments in the Goods and Services Tax Act. There are five different amendments under the GST Act. All of them are GST Council cleared ones. I mean the GST Council has approved them. So, it is only that which are coming in. I understand that some of the Members did have a concern about why GST Council’s decisions should come through this route. Yes, GST Council is a constitutional body. They can take a call. But anything to do with tax collection will have to go through the Parliament, will have to go through the Finance Bill. So, those decisions which have been approved by the GST Council are becoming a part of this Finance Bill. Eight of them with specific intent are being listed. …(Interruptions)
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : It means that Rajya Sabha will not be able to consider it.
SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: Sir, GST is a tax.
Then, I am also talking about the proposal relating to Prevention of Money Laundering Act. I have explained it. So, I would not go further into that.
So far as financial markets are concerned, in the morning I did say that there are eight Acts which are being amended. I listed out the names of them. Some are very, very simple changes. But the one which has probably attracted the attention of some of the Members about which they spoke is the amendment to the Reserve Bank of India Act. I just want to underline as to what is being done on the Reserve Bank of India Act.
The proposed amendment to the RBI Act is to strengthen RBI’s regulatory powers over the regulation of the NBFCs. The amendments have become necessary given the developments which all of us have observed in the last few months particularly on the NBFCs. What are those powers? I will take a minute to explain them. These are: empowering the RBI to supersede the Board of an NBFC; to remove its Directors; to amalgamate or reconstruct or split an NBFC in public interest or for financial stability; to remove and debar auditors, direct the inspection and audit of any group company of an NBFC; to raise the net owned fund requirement of an NBFC and also to impose higher penalties in case of legal contraventions. These are the specific amendments to the RBI Act. All of them came because we want the RBI to take over regulating NBFCs. So, the amendments to the RBI Act is with specific intent of making the RBI a complete empowered regulator.
The National Housing Bank is also something which, we are making sure, is better regulated. So, it is like returning the regulation authority again back to the RBI.
Then, there are amendments in the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act and the Insurance Act respectively. The Insurance Act is important because I heard in the morning some Members spoke about it. I just let you know what is the particular amendment that we are doing.
It is proposed to reduce the net owned funds requirement from Rs.5000 crore to Rs.1000 crore for opening of branches in the International Financial Services Centre (IFSC) by foreign re-insurers. There are amendments again to the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act which we are bringing in.
Lastly, there are amendments in the Central Road and Infrastructure Fund Act. In the morning itself I have explained that this is something only to bring clarity. None of the features of the Central Road and Infrastructure Fund is being changed. The States will receive the money as have always been. The clarity was required because there was always this narrative going around that the Centre is cutting down the States’ share or the States are not empowered. So, there is nothing new there. It is a matter of bringing greater clarity.
There are particular questions which some of the Members have asked. We have explained them in the larger narrative. If some of them need to be explained, I am willing to do it but considering that I am taking significant time, I do not wish to expand unless there is anything in particular which any Member would want to say.
I can take the case of Shri Ritesh Pandey who said that digital payments to political parties cannot be traced. This is a matter of great interest for many of us. I would like to explain it in a minute. Digital payments always leave a complete trail – I am sure that the hon. Member is somewhere here – from the destination to the source. Therefore, it is the Government’s policy to encourage digital payments and use less cash. Therefore, again, the statement is unfounded. Digital payments to political parties will make political donations more transparent.
Sir, Prof. Sougata Ray and also Shri Ritesh Pandey had spoken that tax on cash withdrawals will adversely affect tea growers who have to pay in cash to their employees. The threshold of TDS under Section 194N on cash withdrawals is deliberately set at one crore rupees. Cash withdrawals of up to about eight lakh rupees per month will be excluded from the scope of Section 194N. Thus, small tea growers will not be affected by the TDS. The large tea growers are expected to use banking facilities to make payments in line with the Government’s policy to encourage digital payments and more to move towards less cash transactions.
Shri Bhartruhari Mahtabji spoke about increase in effective tax rate to 42.7 per cent and said that it will lead to flight of FPIs from India. I wish to respond to him by saying that increase in effective tax rate applies only to individual tax-payers, including other forms of FPIs, as I explained a minute ago, those FPIs which are registered as trusts. A trust is treated as an individual legal entity rather than a company. So, the increase in tax rate applies only to individual tax-payers, including other forms of FPIs such as trusts, artificial juridical persons etc. which are treated as individuals. FPIs organised as companies will not be affected by the increase in effective tax rate. Therefore, the fear of flight of FPIs from India is not well founded at all. The increased tax rate will affect only high income individuals and it is the Government’s policy that these individuals should contribute more towards nation-building.
Again, Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab had spoken about tax rates for domestic companies that are proposed at 25 per cent for turnover or gross receipt of up to Rs. 400 crore as against 30 per cent for other domestic companies and partnership firms. This is a very valid question. I would like to respond. The tax rates for domestic companies and partnership firms cannot be compared as distribution of profit to shareholders by domestic companies and is, again, subjected to dividend distribution tax at the rate of 15 per cent. In contrast, distribution of profits to partners of partnerships from their capital account is not subjected to the tax either in the hands of partnership firms or partners. So, there is a distinct difference.
Sir, I think, most of the questions raised by different hon. Members were covered in different answers that I have given. If there is anything in particular, I am ready to answer. There was an interesting question from Shrimati Supriya Sule as to why tax system should not be simplified by bringing a new tax code and why we should not have a relook at the earlier code already examined by the Standing Committee on Finance headed by Shri Yashwant Sinha. Also, I think, one of the hon. Members, Shri Basheer, had said that there should be no delay in bringing the tax code. I just want to respond.
I just want to respond to that. A Task Force is already working on finalising the Report on a new Direct Taxes Code, which is required to be submitted by 31st July. The Government will receive the Report and then we shall take a call on it.
SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY (BAHARAMPUR): What about disability pension?
SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: I will respond, but that is not part of the Finance Bill. If you permit me, I will answer. But that is not part of the Finance Bill at all.
Since the hon. Member has raised the issue of disability pension, I would like to say that the tax deduction, which was there, was removed on the advice of the Armed Forces Headquarters. The Ministry of Defence or the Ministry of Finance has not taken a call on its own. It was a recommendation given by the Armed Forces Headquarters. Of course, I understand the concern of the hon. Member. It is not part of my Finance Bill. But I still would want to honour him with an answer. And the answer is, it is not a decision taken without the recommendation of the Armed Forces Headquarters.
With all these remarks, I would like to repeat that I am very grateful for having given me this chance to respond and also for giving me the permission to lay a Statement describing the amendments and the background and justification for all the amendments which have been made to the PMLA. That may be treated as part of what I have spoken today and be treated as read.
So, with these words, I am again grateful to all the Members who have spoken on the Finance Bill. The intent of the Government is to ensure ‘Minimum Government and Maximum Governance’. Ease of living is the primary driving force of Prime Minister Modi ji. We are making sure that every citizen is completely bereft of all the due-diligence issues. The pain of having to be governed should not be on the citizens. We are trying to reduce the pain and making sure that ease of living dominates in everything that we do as regards taxation. Thank you very much.
STATEMENT RE: AMENDMENT/BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION FOR AMENDMENTS TO PMLA *
1. Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 has been enacted to deal with the serious threat posed not only to the financial system of the country but also to its integrity and sovereignty which is enacted as a self-contained code providing for various aspects of investigation, prosecution and trial as contained in the Act. It has been amended from time to time.
2. Difficulties have been experienced in interpretation of certain provisions of Act of 2002 as some of the provisions are being misconstrued resulting into defeating the very object and legislative intent of the Act. The present amendments have been proposed in order to achieve the object and intent of the Legislature while enacting the Act of 2002. As a member of globally constituted Financial Action Task Force and otherwise also being a State committed to eliminate money laundering, the clarifications and provisions proposed are necessary so as to ensure that no provisions are misconstrued contrary to the legislative intent while enacting the Act of 2002. It has been found expedient and necessary to bring clarificatory amendments for effective implementation of provisions of the Act, regulation and operational measures for combating money laundering, terror financing and other related threats to the integrity of financial system of the country and to achieve the related threats to the integrity of financial system of the country and to achieve the object of the Act of 2002. I would enumerate salient features of the clarificatory amendments and brief reasons for the same. It is also observed that by misconstruing the provisions of this Act, accused being investigated for serious offences attempt to thwart proceedings under the Act.
3. It has been experienced that certain doubts have been expressed as regards the definition of ‘Proceeds of Crime’ included in clause (u) to sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Act of 2002. It is observed that the object and intention of the legislature while enacting Act of 2002 is wrongly understood to mean that only the property which is derived or obtained as a result of commission of scheduled offence would fall within the definition of “proceeds of crime” and the Act of 2002 would apply only to such property. The intention of the legislature had always been that the property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly by any person as a result of not only the commission of the scheduled offence but also any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence would also fall within the definition of “proceeds of crime”. Accordingly, a clarification is proposed to be inserted in clause (u) to sub-section (1) of section 2 to clarify that “proceeds of crime” shall include property not only derived or obtained from the commission of the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence.
4. It has been experienced that certain doubts are also raised as regards definition of ‘Offence of money laundering’ included in section 3 of the Act of 2002. It is observed that the legislative intent and object of the Act of 2002 is wrongly construed as if all the activities as mentioned therein are required to be present together to constitute the offence of Money Laundering. The intention of the legislature had always been that a person shall be held to be guilty of offence of money-laundering if he is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any one or more of the process or activity included in section 3 of the Act of 2002. It is also observed that the original intention of the legislature is wrongly construed to interpret as if the offence of money laundering is a one time instantaneous offence and finishes with its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property. The intention of the legislature had always been that a person will be held to be guilty of offence of money-laundering and will be punished as long as person is enjoying the “proceeds of crime” by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property or in any manner whatsoever. Accordingly, an Explanation is proposed to be inserted in section 3 of the Act of 2002 to clarify the above legislative intent.
5. Proviso to sections 17 and 18 of the Act of 2002 provide that no search and seizure can be carried out unless a report under Section 157 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in relation to a scheduled offence has been forwarded to a magistrate. It is seen that due to the fact that sections 17 and 18 of the Act put a pre-condition on search and seizure, in cases where the Police authorities have failed or delayed registration of FIR, Directorate of Enforcement sits as a mute spectator and accused persons continue money laundering with impunity. As against this section 19 of the Act specifically empowers the authorized officer to arrest any person, if on the basis of material in the possession of the officer/s under the Act, he has reason to believe, which are to be recorded in writing, that a person is guilty of an offence punishable under the Act. Section 19 of the Act does not put any pre-condition of forwarding of a report under section 157 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in relation to a scheduled offence, prior to exercising power to arrest. Similarly second proviso to section 5 of the Act, specifically empowers the authorized officer to attach property without there being any requirement of any report under section 157 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on recording of satisfaction that if property is not attached, the non-attachment is likely to frustrate any proceedings under the Act. Absence of such pre-conditions have a reasonable nexus with the object of the Act of 2002 and very nature of the offence under the Act. Thus, an anomalous situation is observed that, though an arrest under the Act of 2002 can be made even if FIR is not recorded under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in relation to a scheduled offence, the search however cannot be carried out under the Act of 2002 without such an FIR. Section 17 of the Act of 2002 specifically records that authorisation for search is given by very senior officers of the Directorate of Enforcement after recording reasons to believe that the person has committed an act which constitutes money laundering. Therefore, when adequate safeguard has already been provided in the form of recording of reasons in writing by a senior officer, the condition that it cannot be carried out unless a report under section 157 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is forwarded to a magistrate does not serve any purpose. Moreover at every stage of proceedings under the Act of 2002, the reasons are required to be recorded in writing before any action is taken. Any action under the Act including search, seizure, attachment, arrest, etc. are taken after recording of “reasons to believe” in writing on the basis of material on record and such reasons are always subject to perusal of the competent jurisdictional court. The said action is also further subject to judicial scrutiny either under the Act of 2002 or under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as provided under section 65 of the Act of 2002. Thus no purpose is served by putting a condition on action taken under section 17 and 18.
6. In view of the above, the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 17 and proviso to sub-section (1) of section 18 of the Act of 2002 are proposed to be omitted. This would empower the Directorate of Enforcement to undertake search action under the Act of 2002 as regards the offence of money laundering on information of scheduled offence even in the absence of report under section 157 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
7. There is no specific provision in the Act of 2002 to close an investigation if no evidence of commission of an offence under this Act is found though such a requirement is always inbuilt whenever an investigation commences. In order to make a specific provision providing for bringing a finality and closure in cases where no offence under the Act of 2002 is found to have taken place, a proviso is proposed to be inserted after clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 44 of the Act of 2002 to provide that if, after conclusion of investigation, no offence of money-laundering is made out requiring filing of the complaint under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 44 of the Act, the authority authorized under the Act shall submit a closure report before the Special Court empowered under this Act.
8. Considering the very serious nature of the menace of money laundering where the burden of proof is different, it is observed that, in spite of offences under the Act of 2002 having been established, the accused seeks orders from the Special Court based upon the orders which may have been passed by the Courts dealing with scheduled offences. The Act of 2002 neither stipulates a joint trial nor trial of scheduled offences and offences under the Act of 2002 together. The legislative intent was merely to try both the offences by the same Court. If this original legislative intent is not clarified, any order/s passed with respect to the scheduled offence/s even on account of death, want of sanction of prosecution of a public servant, etc. will impact the fully investigated case under the Act of 2002. This was never the legislative intent of this Act by the very nature of the distinction between the scheduled offence(s) an offence(s) under the Act of 2002.
9. It is also observed that the original intention of the legislature is wrongly construed to restrict the jurisdiction of the agency to conduct further investigation after filing of the complaint under the Act of 2002 and is construed to be precluded from filing further evidence, oral or documentary collected after filing of the complaint against any accused persons involved in respect of the offence for which complaint has already been filed though such power of further investigation and placing further evidence before the competent jurisdictional court is inbuilt in any investigation. Accordingly, an Explanation is proposed to be inserted after clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 44 of the Act of 2002 to clarify the above legislative intent and to make a specific clarificatory provision which was, otherwise, inbuilt in the Act.
10. For the intention of the legislature, what is relevant is the overall scheme and plain meaning of the language employed in the law as to whether the offences under the Act of 2002 are cognizable or not. It can be gathered from the plain meaning of the language of the various provisions of the Act, the purpose is to create a machinery and mechanism for investigation and enforcement of the offences under this Act outside the general system of investigation of crimes by police agencies. The police officers working either under the Code of Criminal Procedure or other enactments are kept out during every stage under this Act, unless there is a specific authorization in this behalf. The information of a crime punishable under the Act of 2002 is taken note of by the Director of Enforcement or the officers aiding or assisting him in the task and the investigative process taken up thereunder. If there are grounds to initiate such action, the Director or the empowered officer records the reasons in writing for the belief, noticing and adding thereto the material already collected, on which such belief is founded and proceeds to provisionally attach such property as, in his opinion, may be prima facie tainted. Further, if during the course of investigation, on the basis of material in his possession, he has reason to believe the complicity of a person in an offence under the Act of 2002, he is authorized by the law to proceed to arrest him, after recording reasons for such belief in writing. Both recorded reasons, one leading to the attachment of the suspect property and the other leading to the arrest, are to be made over to the Adjudicating Authority with copies of the material from which inferences or conclusions had been drawn. The powers of survey, search and seizure, search of persons, retention of property or of records, to issue summons to enforce attendance of any person and compel him to give evidence or produce records, discovery or inspection, as indeed the power to arrest, as conferred by various provisions of the Act of 2002 on the investigative agency created by the law equip such agency with all the necessary tools to conduct an effective investigation without the aid or assistance of police. For purposes of criminal investigation and prosecution, the initiative is entrusted to the authorities established under the Act of 2002.
11. Enforcement officers under PMLA do not require the powers of police for investigation as granted by the general law contained in Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. On the contrary, the prevailing misconstruction that the said part of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 applies to the investigation under this Act brings in inconsistency – in breach of the mandate, object and intent of section 65 of the Act of 2002 in particular and the scheme of the Act in general. There is nothing in the Act of 2002 to indicate that the power to arrest conferred on the Director or the other specified officers is contingent upon either formal authorization by the court or otherwise except the conditions stipulated under the Act itself as inbuilt safeguards. The authorization to the Director or other specified officers to take up the investigation or exercise any of the powers thereby conferred do not require prior approval from the court in each case.
12. The offences under PMLA thus, are and have always been “cognizable”, which would, inter alia, mean that a person respecting whom there is a reason to believe to be guilty for such offence may be arrested by the officer empowered by the law in terms of section 19 of the Act of 2002 without the need of obtaining warrant of arrest from the court. Thus, the use of the expression “cognizable” in relation to offences under the Act of 2002 would be different from the one applied for general law offences such as IPC offences and consequently, the definition of the expressions “cognizable offence” and “cognizable case” as appearing in sub-section (c) of section 2 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 would have to be read and applied mutatis mutandis with suitable modification – that is to say, by substituting the words “a police officer” and instead referring to the officers mentioned in section 19 of the Act of 2002. The offences under this Act are and have always been “cognizable and non bailable”.
13. Accordingly, an Explanation is proposed to be inserted after section 45 of the Act of 2002 to clarify that the expression ‘Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable’ shall mean and shall be deemed to have always meant that all offences under the Act of 2002 shall be cognizable offences and non-bailable offences notwithstanding anyting to the contrary contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or any other enactment. Accordingly, the Officers authorized under the Act of 2002 are empowered to arrest an accused without warrant subject to the fulfilment of conditions under section 19 of the said Act and the provisions for bail of such a person shall be subject to the conditions enshrined in section 45 of the Act.
माननीय अध्यक्ष : माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी ने एक वक्तव्य सदन के पटल पर भी रखा है, जो वित्त विधेयक (सं. 2), 2019 में किए जाने वाले उस संशोधन के बारे में है । यह संशोधन प्रिवेंशन ऑफ मनी लाँड्रिंग अधिनियम, 2002 से संबंधित है । यह वक्तव्य माननीय मंत्री जी के भाषण के अंत में लोक सभा की कार्यवाही में जोड़ दिया जाए । यह वक्तव्य सदन की कार्यवाही का अंग होगा ।
“कि वित्तीय वर्ष 2019-2020 के लिए केन्द्रीय सरकार के वित्तीय प्रस्तावों को लागू करने के लिए विधेयक पर विचार किया जाए ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष : अब सभा विधेयक पर खंडवार विचार करेगी ।
खंड 2 और 3 आयकर तथा धारा 2 का संशोधन माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है : “कि खंड 2 और 3विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ । खंड 2 और 3 विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए । Clause 4 Amendment of Section 9 Amendment made: Page 6, for lines 47 to 49, substitute – “(viii) income arising outside India, being any sum of money referred to in sub-clause (xviia) of clause (24) of section 2, paid on or after the 5th day of July, 2019 by a person resident in India to a non-resident, not being a company, or to a foreign company.” (7) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष :प्रश्न यह है : “कि खंड 4 यथा संशोधित, विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ । खंड 4 यथा संशोधित , विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया । खंड 5 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया । Clause 6 Amendment of Section 10 Amendments made: Page 7, after line 5, insert –
(IA) after clause (4C) as so inserted, the following shall be inserted with effect from 1st day of April, 2020, namely:--
“(4D) any income accrued or arisen to, or received by a specified fund as a result of transfer of capital asset referred to in clause (viiab) of section 47, on a recognised stock exchange located in any International Financial Services Centre and where the consideration for such transaction is paid or payable in convertible foreign exchange, to the extent such income accrued or arisen to, or is received in respect of units held by a non-resident.
Explanation – For the purposes of this clause, the expression – 42 of 1999 (a) “convertible foreign exchange” means foreign exchange which is for the time being treated by the Reserve Bank of India as convertible foreign exchange for the purposes of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 and the rules made thereunder;
15 of 1992 (b) “manager” shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (q) of sub-regulation (1) of regulation 2 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Alternative Investment Fund) Regulations, 2012, made under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992;
(c) “Specified Fund” means a fund established or incorporated in India in the form of a trust or a company or a limited liability partnership or a body corporate, --
15 of 1992. (i) which has been granted a certificate of registration as a Category III Alternative Investment Fund and is regulated under the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Alternative Investment Fund) Regulations, 2012, made under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992;
(ii) which is located in any International Financial Services Centre;
(iii) of which all the units are held by non-residents other than units held by a sponsor or manager;
15 of 1992. (d) “sponsor” shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (w) of sub-regulation (1) of regulation 2 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Alternative Investment Fund) Regulations, 2012, made under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992;
2 of 1882. (e) “trust” means a trust established under the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 or under any other law for the time being in force;
(f) “unit” means beneficial interest of an investor in the fund and shall include shares or partnership interests;’. (8) Page 7, after line 16, insert – ‘(IIA) in clause (23C), with effect from the 1st day of September, 2019,--
(a) In the second proviso, for the words “and the prescribed authority”, the words “and the compliance of such requirements under any other law for the time being in force by such fund or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution, as the case may be, as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects and the prescribed authority,” shall be substituted;
(b) In the fifteenth proviso, for the portion beginning with “(ii) the activities of such fund” and ending with “was notified or approved,”, the following shall be substituted, namely:--
“(ii) the activities of such fund or institution or trust or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution— (A) are not genuine; or (B) are not being carried out in accordance with all or any of the conditions subject to which it was notified or approved; or
(iii) such fund or institution or trust or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution has not complied with the requirement of any other law for the time being in force, and the order, direction or decree, by whatever name called, holding that such non-compliance has occurred, has either not been disputed or has attained finality,”. (9) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष :प्रश्न यह है :
“कि खंड 6, यथा संशोधित, विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 6, यथा संशोधित , विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
खंड 7 से 16 तक विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए ।
Clause 17 Amendment of Section 47 Amendments made: Page 9, omit lines 13 and 14 (10) Page 9, omit lines 18 to 32 (11) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है : “कि खंड 17, यथा संशोधित, विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ । खंड 17, यथा संशोधित विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया । खंड 18 से 20 विधेयक में जोड़ दिये गये । Clause 21 Amendment of Section 56 Amendments made: Page 10, for lines 7 to 9, substitute– ‘consideration received for issue of share that exceeds the fair market value of such share shall be deemed to be the income of that company chargeable to income-tax for the previous year in which such failure has taken place and, it shall also be deemed that the company has underreported the said income in consequence of the misreporting referred to in sub-section (8) and sub-section (9) of section 270A for the said previous years.”,’. (12) Page 10, in line 13, for “Category II”, substitute “Category I or a Category II” (13) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है : “कि खंड 21, यथा संशोधित, विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ । खंड 21, यथा संशोधित , विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया । खंड 22 से 36 विधेयक में जोड़ दिये गये । Clause 37 Amendment of Section 115R Amendments made: Page 15, for line 36, substitute ‘International Financial Services Centre and where the consideration for such transaction is paid or payable in convertible foreign exchange:”,’. (14) Page 15, omit line 50. (15) Page 16, line 1, for “(c)”, substitute “(b)”. (16) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है : “कि खंड 37, यथा संशोधित, विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ । खंड 37, यथा संशोधित , विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया । खंड 38 से 44 विधेयक में जोड़ दिये गये । Clause 45 Amendment of Section 194-IA Amendment made: Page 18, line 13, for “consideration for immovable property”, substitute “consideration for transfer of any immovable property”. (17) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है : “कि खंड 45, यथा संशोधित, विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ । खंड 45, यथा संशोधित , विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया । Clause 46 Insertion of Section 194M and 194N Amendments made: Page 18, for lines 19 to 24, substitute-- “required to deduct income-tax as per the provisions of section 194C, section 194H or section 194J responsible for paying any sum to any resident for carrying out any work (including supply of labour for carrying out any work) in pursuance of a contract, by way of commission (not being insurance commission referred to in section 194D) or brokerage or by way of fees for professional services during the financial years, shall, at the time of credit of such sum or at the time of payment of such sum in cash or by issue of a cheque or draft or by any other mode, whichever is earlier, deduct an amount equal to five per cent of such sum as income-tax thereon:”. (18) Page 18, for lines 33 to 36, substitute—
‘(b) “commission or brokerage shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (i) of the Explanation to section 194H;
(c)“professional services” shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (a) of the Explanation to section 194J;
(d)“work” shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (iv) of the Explanation to section 194C; (19) Page 18, line 44, for “from an account”, substitute “from one or more accounts”. (20) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“कि खंड 46, यथा संशोधित, विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 46, यथा संशोधित , विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
खंड 47 और 48 विधेयक में जोड़ दिये गये ।
Motion Re: Suspension of Rule 80 (i) SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: Sir, I beg to move:
“That this House do suspend clause (i) of rule 80 of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha in so far as it requires that an amendment shall be within the scope of the Bill and relevant to the subject matter of the clause to which it relates, in its application to Government amendment No. 21* to the Finance (No.2) Bill, 2019 and that this amendment may be allowed to be moved.” माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“यह सभा, लोक सभा के प्रक्रिया तथा कार्य संचालन नियमों के नियम 80 के खंड (1) को, जहां तक उसमें यह अपेक्षा की गयी है कि संशोधन विधेयक की व्याप्ति के भीतर होगा और जिस खंड से उसका संबंध हो उसके विषय के सुसंगत होगा, वित्त (संख्यांक 2) विधेयक, 2019 की सरकारी संशोधन संख्या 21 को लागू करने के संबंध में, निलंबित करती है और यह कि इस संशोधन को पेश करने की अनुमति दी जाये । ” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
New Clause 48A Amendments made:
Page 19, after line 15, insert – 48A. In section 198 of the Income-tax Act, after the first proviso, the following proviso shall be inserted with effect from the 1st day of September, 2019, namely – “Provided further that the sum deducted in accordance with the provisions of section 194N for the purpose of computing the income of an assessee, shall not be deemed to be income received.”.’. (21) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“कि नया खंड 48क विधेयक में जोड़ दिया जाए ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
नया खंड 48 क विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया । खंड 49 से 174 विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए । Motion Re: Suspension of Rule 80 (i) SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: I beg to move:
“That this House do suspend clause (i) of rule 80 of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha in so far as it requires that an amendment shall be within the scope of the Bill and relevant to the subject matter of the clause to which it relates, in its application to the Government amendment No. 22* to the Finance Bill (No. 2), 2019 and that this amendment may be allowed to be moved.” माननीय अध्यक्ष: प्रश्न यह है:
“कि यह सभा, लोक सभा के प्रक्रिया तथा कार्य संचालन नियमों के नियम 80 के खंड (1) को, जहां तक उसमें यह अपेक्षा की गयी है कि संशोधन विधेयक की व्याप्ति के भीतर होगा और जिस खंड से उसका संबंध हो उसके विषय के सुसंगत होगा, वित्त (संख्यांक 2) विधेयक, 2019 की सरकारी संशोधन संख्या 22* को लागू करने के संबंध में, निलंबित करती है और यह कि इस संशोधन को पेश करने की अनुमति दी जाये ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
New Clauses 174A, 174B and 174C Amendment made:
Page 51, after line 7, insert— Amendment of section 30 174A. In section 30 of the principal Act, for the words “the Adjudicating Authority”, the words “any authority” shall be substituted with effect from the 1st day of September, 2019.
Amendment of section 46.
174B. In section 46 of the principal Act, with effect from the 1st day of September, 2019, --
(a) after sub-section(1), the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely:--
“(1A) Any person aggrieved by an order passed by the authority under section 54A may prefer an appeal in such form alongwith such fees, as may be prescribed, to the Appellate Tribunal against the said order within a period of forty-five days from the date of that order.”;
(b) in sub-section (3), after the word, brackets and figure “sub-section (1)”, the words, brackets, figure and letter “or sub-section (1A)” shall be inserted.
Amendment of section 47.
174C. In section 47 of the principal Act, for sub-section (1), the following sub-section shall be substituted with effect from the 1st day of September, 2019, namely:--
“(1) The Appellate Tribunal or any authority may, in order to rectify any mistake apparent on the face of the record, amend any order passed by it under the provisions of this Act, within a period of one year from the end of the month in which such order was passed.”.’. (22) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
‘‘कि नए खंड 174 क, 174 ख और 174 ग विधेयक में जोड़ दिए जाएं ।’’ प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
नए खंड 174 क , 174 ख और 174 ग विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए ।
खंड 175 से 184 विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए ।
Clause 185 Insertion of new Section 15HAA माननीय अध्यक्ष : श्री एन.के. प्रेमचन्द्रन, क्या आप संशोधन प्रस्तुत करना चाहते हैं?
SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN (KOLLAM): Sir, I beg to move :
Page 53, line 4, --
for “Rs. 10 per litre” substitute “Rs. 5 per litre”. (1) Page 53, line 5, --
for “Rs. 4 per litre” substitute “50 paise per litre”. (2)
Sir, I am moving Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 regarding the petrol price cess as well as special additional excise duty to be reduced to Rs. 5 as well as 50 paise respectively.
माननीय अध्यक्ष: अब मैं श्री एन.के. प्रेमचन्द्रन द्वारा खंड 185 में प्रस्तुत संशोधन संख्या 1 और 2 को सभा के समक्ष मतदान के लिए रखता हूं ।
संशोधन मतदान के लिए रखे गए तथा अस्वीकृत हुए ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
‘‘कि खंड 185 विधेयक का अंग बने ।’’ प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 185 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
खंड 186 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
Motion Re: Suspension of Rule 80 (i) SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: I beg to move:
“That this House do suspend clause (i) of rule 80 of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha in so far as it requires that an amendment shall be within the scope of the Bill and relevant to the subject matter of the clause to which it relates, in its application to the Government amendment No. 23* to the Finance (No. 2) Bill, 2019 and that this amendment may be allowed to be moved.” माननीय अध्यक्ष: प्रश्न यह है:
“यह सभा, लोक सभा के प्रक्रिया तथा कार्य संचालन नियमों के नियम 80 के खंड (1) को, जहां तक उसमें यह अपेक्षा की गयी है कि संशोधन विधेयक की व्याप्ति के भीतर होगा और जिस खंड से उसका संबंध हो, उसके विषय के सुसंगत होगा, वित्त (संख्यांक 2) विधेयक, 2019 की सरकारी संशोधन संख्या 23* को लागू करने के संबंध में, निलंबित करती है और यह कि इस संशोधन को पेश करने की अनुमति दी जाये ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
New Clause 186A Amendment made:
Page 53, after line 13, insert— “Commencement of this Part.
186A. Clause (iii) of section 187, sections 187A, 190A, 190B, 190C and 190D shall come into force from the 1st day of August, 2019.”. (23) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
‘‘कि नया खंड 186क विधेयक में जोड़ दिया जाए ।’’ प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
नया खंड 186 क विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
Clause 187 Amendment of Section 11 Amendment made: Page 53, after line 19, insert—
‘(iii) in clause (u), the following Explanation shall be inserted, namely:--
‘Explanation. -- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that “proceeds of crime” include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence;’. (24) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
‘‘कि खंड 187, यथा संशोधित, विधेयक का अंग बने ।’’ प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 187, यथा संशोधित , विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
Motion Re: Suspension of Rule 80 (i) SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: I beg to move:
“That this House do suspend clause (i) of rule 80 of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha in so far as it requires that an amendment shall be within the scope of the Bill and relevant to the subject matter of the clause to which it relates, in its application to the Government amendment No. 25* to the Finance (No. 2) Bill, 2019 and that this amendment may be allowed to be moved.” माननीय अध्यक्ष: प्रश्न यह है:
“यह सभा, लोक सभा के प्रक्रिया तथा कार्य संचालन नियमों के नियम 80 के खंड (1) को, जहां तक उसमें यह अपेक्षा की गयी है कि संशोधन विधेयक की व्याप्ति के भीतर होगा और जिस खंड से उसका संबंध हो, उसके विषय के सुसंगत होगा, वित्त (संख्यांक 2) विधेयक, 2019 की सरकारी संशोधन संख्या 25* को लागू करने के संबंध में, निलंबित करती है और यह कि इस संशोधन को पेश करने की अनुमति दी जाये ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
New Clause 187A Amendment made:
Page 53, after line 19, insert— Amendment of section 3.
187A. In section 3 of the principal Act, the following Explanation shall be inserted, namely:--
“Explanation. -- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that,-
(i) a person shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering if such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with proceeds of crime, namely:---
(a) concealment; or (b) possession; or (c) acquisition; or (d) use; or (e) projecting as untainted property; or (f) claiming as untainted property, in any manner whatsoever; (ii) the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever.”. (25) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है : ‘‘कि नया खंड 187क विधेयक में जोड़ दिया जाए ।’’ प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ । नया खंड 187 क विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया । खंड 188 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया । Clause 189 Amendment Act 20 of 2002 Amendments made: Page 53, for lines 25 and 26, substitute –
“(a) verify the identity of the clients undertaking such specified transaction by authentication under the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 in such manner and subject to such conditions, as may be prescribed:
Provided that where verification requires authentication of a person who is not entitled to obtain an Aadhaar number under the provisions of the said Act, verification to authenticate the identity of the client undertaking such specified transaction shall be carried out by such other process or mode, as may be prescribed;”. (26) Page 53, for lines 37 to 42, substitute – “(4) The information obtained while applying the enhanced due diligence measures under sub-section (1) shall be maintained for a period of five years from the date of transaction between a client and the reporting entity.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this section, “specified transaction” means-
(a) any withdrawal or deposit in cash, exceeding such amount; (b) any transaction in foreign exchange, exceeding such amount; (c) any transaction in any high value imports or remittances;
(d) such other transaction or class of transactions, in the interest or where there is a high risk of money-laundering or terrorist financing, as may be prescribed.’. (27) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“कि खंड 189, यथा संशोधित, विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 189, यथा संशोधित , विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
खंड 190, विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
Motion Re: Suspension of Rule 80(i) SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: I beg to move:
“That this House do suspend clause (i) of rule 80 of the Rules of `Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha in so far as it requires that an amendment shall be within the scope of the Bill and relevant to the subject matter of the clause to which it relates, in its application to Government amendment No.28* to the Finance (No.2) Bill, 2019 and that this amendment may be allowed to be moved.” माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रस्ताव प्रस्तुत हुआ :
“यह सभा, लोक सभा के प्रक्रिया तथा कार्य संचालन नियमों के नियम 80 के खंड (1) को, जहां तक उसमें यह अपेक्षा की गई है कि संशोधन विधेयक की व्याप्ति के भीतर होगा और जिस खंड से उसका संबंध हो उसके विषय के सुसंगत होगा, वित्त (संख्यांक 2) विधेयक, 2019 की सरकारी संशोधन संख्या 28* को लागू करने के संबंध में, निलंबित करती है और यह कि इस संशोधन को पेश करने की अनुमति दी जाए” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
New Clauses 190A, 190B, 190C and 190D Amendments made:
Page 53, after lines 45, insert – New clauses 190A, 190B, 190C and 190D ‘Amendment of section 17 190A. In section 17 of the principal Act, in sub-section (1), the proviso shall be omitted.
Amendment of section 18 190B. In section 18 of the principal Act, in sub-section (1), the proviso shall be omitted.
Amendment of section 44 190C. In section 44 of the principal Act, in sub-section (1), the proviso shall be omitted.
1. after clause (b), the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:-
“Provided that after conclusion of investigation, if no offence of money-laundering is made out requiring filing of such complaint, the said authority shall submit a closure report before the Special Court; or”;
(ii) after clause (d), the following Explanation shall be inserted, namely:-
“Explanation.- For the removal of doubts, it is clarified that,-
(i) the jurisdiction of the Special Court while dealing with the offence under this Act, during investigation, enquiry or trial under this Act, shall not be dependent upon any orders passed in respect of the scheduled offence, and the trial of both sets of offences by the same court shall not be construed as joint trial;
(ii) the complaint shall be deemed to include any subsequent complaint in respect of further investigation that may be conducted to bring any further evidence, oral or documentary, against any accused person involved in respect of the offence, for which complaint has already been filed, whether named in the original complaint or not.”.
Amendment of section 45 2 of 1974 190D. In section 45 of the principal Act, after sub-section (2), the following Explanation shall be inserted, namely:-
Èxplanation.- for the removal of doubts, it is clarified that the expression “Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable” shall mean and shall be deemed to have always meant that all offences under this Act shall be cognizable offences and non-bailable offences notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and accordingly the officers authorised under this Act are empowered to arrest an accused without warrant, subject to the fulfilment of conditions under section 19 and subject to the conditions enshrined under this section.”.’. (28) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
‘‘कि नए खंड 190क, 190 ख, 190ग और 190घ विधेयक में जोड़ दिए जाएं’’ प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
नए खंड 190 क , 190 ख , 190 ग और 190 घ विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए ।
खंड 191 से 193 विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए ।
खंड 194 2007के अधिनियम संख्यांक 51 का संशोधन Amendment made:
Page 54, lines 35 and 36, for “shall impose any charge upon anyone, either directly or indirectly, for”, substitute “shall impose, whether directly or indirectly, any charge upon a person making or receiving a payment by”. (29) (Shrimati Nirmala Sitharaman) माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“कि खंड 194 यथा संशोधित विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 194, यथा संशोधित , विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
खंड 195 से 200 विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए ।
खंड 201 माननीय अध्यक्ष : श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन, क्या आप संशोधन संख्या 3 प्रस्तुत कर रहे हैं?
SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN (KOLLAM): I beg to move:
Page 53, line 4, -
for “Rs.10 per litre” substitute “Rs.5 per litre”. (3)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : अब मैं श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन द्वारा खंड 201 में प्रस्तुत संशोधन संख्या 3 को सभा के समक्ष मतदान के लिए रखता हूं ।
संशोधन मतदान के लिए रखा गया तथा अस्वीकृत हुआ ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
‘‘कि खंड 201 विधेयक का अंग बने ।’’ प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 201 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
खंड 202 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
The First Schedule माननीय अध्यक्ष : श्री भर्तृहरि महताब जी, क्या आप संशोधन प्रस्तुत कर रहे हैं?
…(व्यवधान)
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB (CUTTACK): Hon. Speaker, Sir, I had told while participating in the debate that the idea that was mooted by our former Finance Minister, Shri Arun Jaitley. This Government should not forget. The Government should proceed or the country should proceed to be competitive in the world market.
That is the reason why I have moved this amendment. The crux of the matter is that the Government has granted a big relief to small companies by reducing the rate of income tax from 30 per cent to 25 per cent. If the company has a turnover of up to Rs. 400 crore as against the normal rate of 30 per cent income tax which is applicable to the larger companies. Why is this benefit being extended to only companies? There are many partnership firms, limited liability partnerships which run business on small scale but they are still subjected to 30 per cent income tax. I am, therefore, moving my amendment to the First Schedule:
Page 63, for line 33, substitute,--
“(i) Where the total turnover or the gross receipt in the previous year 2017-18 does not exceed four hundred crore 25 per cent. of the total income;
(ii) Other than that referred to in item (i) 30 per cent. of the total income.” (5) माननीय अध्यक्ष: अब मैं श्री भृर्तहरि महताब द्वारा प्रथम अनुसूची में प्रस्तुत संशोधन संख्या 5 को सभा के समक्ष मतदान के लिए रखता हूं ।
संशोधन मतदान के लिए रखा गया तथा अस्वीकृत हुआ ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष: प्रश्न यह है :
“कि पहली अनुसूची विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
पहली अनुसूची को विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
दूसरी अनुसूची को विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
तीसरी अनुसूची को विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
चौथी अनुसूची माननीय अध्यक्ष: श्री भृर्तहरि महताब जी, क्या आप संशोधन प्रस्तुत करना चाहते हैं?
श्री भर्तृहरि महताब : ये न्यूज पेपर ऑर्गेनाइजेशन के बारे में है । पिछले साल से 5 परसेंट जी.एस.टी. लागू हो चुका है ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष: माननीय सदस्य, ये नहीं बोलना है । आप वरिष्ठ सदस्य हैं । आप अमेंडमेंट मूव कीजिए ।
श्री भर्तृहरि महताब : मैं यह कनविंस करना चाहता हूं कि जब उसके ऊपर 10 परसेंट इम्पोर्ट ड्यूटी लगी हुई है तो It comes to 15 per cent on imported newsprint. हमारे यहां जो इण्डिजिनस न्यूज प्रिंट प्रोड्यूस हो रहे हैं, वे सब बिक जाते हैं, बचते नहीं है । लेवल प्लेइंग फील्ड के लिए जो व्यवस्था है, उसी को बरकरार रखने की जरूरत है । I request the Government to withdraw this 10 per cent.
Therefore, I beg to move my amendment to the Fourth Schedule:
Page 69, after line 5, insert,--
‘(IA) in Chapter 48, in column (4), for the entry “10%” occurring against all the tariff items of heading 4801, the entry “Nil” shall be substituted:’. (6) माननीय अध्यक्ष: अब मैं श्री भृर्तहरि महताब द्वारा चौथी अनुसूची में प्रस्तुत संशोधन संख्या 6 को सभा के समक्ष मतदान के लिए रखता हूं ।
संशोधन मतदान के लिए रखा गया तथा अस्वीकृत हुआ ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष: प्रश्न यह है :
“कि चौथी अनुसूची विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
चौथी अनुसूची को विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
पांचवीं अनुसूची को विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
खण्ड 1, अधिनियमन सूत्र और विधेयक का पूरा नाम विधेयक में जोड़ दि ए ग ए ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष: माननीय मंत्री जी प्रस्ताव करें कि विधेयक, यथा संशोधित, पारित किया जाए ।
SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: I beg to move:
“That the Bill, as amended, be passed.” माननीय अध्यक्ष: प्रश्न यह है:
“कि विधेयक, यथा संशोधित, पारित किया जाए ” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष: माननीय सदस्यगण, जैसा कि आपको विदित है कि वित्त (संख्यांक 2) विधेयक, 2019 में कुछ नए खण्ड जोड़े गए हैं । इसलिए मैं निर्देश देता हूं कि परवर्ती खण्डों को तद्नुसार पुन: क्रमांकन कर लिया जाए ।
मैं सभी माननीय सदस्यों को धन्यवाद देता हूं । मैं आपको एक जानकारी भी देता हूं कि पहली बार इस सदन के अंदर पक्ष, प्रतिपक्ष के सभी माननीय सदस्यों ने जनरल डिबेट पर 17 घण्टे 23 मिनट चर्चा की है । रेलवे पर 13 घण्टे तक चर्चा हुआ और रात 12 बजे तक एक सारगर्भित चर्चा हुई । रोड ट्रांसपोर्ट पर 7 घण्टे 44 मिनट चर्चा हुई । रूरल डेवलपमेंट, एग्रीकल्चर पर 10 घण्टे 36 मिनट चर्चा हुई । यूथ अफेयर्स पर 4 घण्टे 14 मिनट चर्चा हुई । जितना समय बिज़नेस एडवाइजरी कमेटी ने तय किया था, सत्तापक्ष ने कहा 8 घण्टे और प्रतिपक्ष ने कहा 10 घण्टे, लेकिन हमने कहा कि यह सदन 17 घण्टे चर्चा करेगा । मैं सभी माननीय सदस्यों को इसमें भाग लेने के लिए धन्यवाद देता हूं ।
18.00 hrs माननीय अध्यक्ष: माननीय सदस्यगण, सभा की कार्यवाही 2 घंटे के लिए बढ़ाई जाती है । आप सबकी सहमति हो तो ‘शून्य काल’ शुरू किया जाए । मैं सभी माननीय सदस्यगण से आग्रह करूंगा कि आप सबके आग्रह पर ‘शून्य काल’ शुरू होने वाला है । अभी आपने सहमति से 2 घंटे बढ़ाए हैं । आपकी सहमति होगी तो इसको और बढ़ाया जाएगा, ताकि सभी माननीय सदस्यों को ‘शून्य काल’ में सदन में अपनी बात कहने का मौका मिले । अब मैं सभी माननीय सदस्यों से आग्रह करूंगा कि वे कृपया अपने-अपने स्थान पर बैठने की कृपा करें । श्री ए.के.पी. चिनराज ।