Tuesday, May 27, 2025

GST - Taxation system


 

GST - Taxation system


India implemented the Goods and Services Tax (GST) on July 1, 2017. Numerous national and state levies existed prior to the GST. The primary goals were to remove unnecessary taxes, promote business, and simplify taxation. There are five different GST tax rates: 0%, 5%, 12%, 18%, and 28%. The highest GST rate is 28% for luxury goods like SUVs and sedan cars, homes, casinos, etc. It is a destination-based tax since it is imposed according to the location of the consumption of the goods or services.
 

It was expected some reformation in taxation, but public alleged for the wrong rate of GST levied.  

India implemented the Goods and Services Tax (GST) on July 1, 2017. Numerous national and state levies existed prior to the GST. The primary goals were to remove unnecessary taxes, promote business, and simplify taxation. There are five different GST tax rates: 0%, 5%, 12%, 18%, and 28%. The highest GST rate is 28% for luxury goods like SUVs and sedan cars, homes, casinos, etc. It is a destination-based tax since it is imposed according to the location of the consumption of the goods or services. It was expected some reformation in taxation, but public alleged for the wrong rate of GST levied.   

Allegations of flawed GST implementation in India include concerns that the complex structure, multiple rates, and specific exclusions have created unintended consequences, such as harming the circular economy and leading to a shift in demand from the unorganized sector to the organized sector. Other criticisms point to issues like tax evasion, a rise in fake input tax credit (ITC) claims, and the burden placed on businesses due to strict enforcement that sometimes focuses on technicalities over the substance of transactions. 

It is imposed on transactions between a Union Territory state and the Central Government of India for goods and services. Central levies like Central Excise Duty, Customs Duty, Central Sales Tax, and SAD (Special Additional Duty Tax) have been superseded by CGST.

State-GST, or S-GST 

The State Government imposes this GST on transactions involving products and services that take place within the state. Apart from the CGST, it is the tax imposed within a state. Value Added Tax, Entertainment Tax, Entry Tax, Luxury Tax, and other taxes are replaced by SGTS.  

 

Integrated Goods and Services Tax, or I-GST 

In contrast to CGST and SGTS, which are levied intrastate, the IGST is imposed on transactions involving goods and services that occur interstate, or between two or more states. The central government collects IGST, which the individual states then refund.

Union Territories-GST (UT-GST)

 

Transactions involving goods and services in the five Idia union territories—Daman and Diu, Dadar and Nagar Haveli, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Chandigarh, and Lakshadweep—are subject to this GST. The sum of the CGST and UTGST is the GST in the union territory.

GST's difficulties and challenges: 

GST offers the government, producers, wholesalers, retailers, and eventually consumers a number of benefits, but it also presents certain difficulties.

It is not possible to use CGST and SGST input credits interchangeably.

On a larger scale, manufacturing states suffer significant revenue losses.

A high revenue neutral rate is the outcome of imposing a higher tax rate to make up for the money that was previously collected from various taxes.

The states' financial independence started declining due to the revenue share of the state government.

Concerns have been raised by banks and insurance providers regarding the need for multiple GST registrations.

Accusations and problems with GST implementation:

False ITC claims: The government has discovered a substantial number of false ITC claims; in the April–June quarter of 2025 alone, officers found approximately ₹15,851 crore in bogus claims. This includes complex techniques like as circular trading, in which companies fabricate transactions in order to obtain ITC. 

Implementation of GST  was imposed on Service Provider, as a result a small scale organisations or small business could not cope up the rigid level of rulings and closed down.

Inconsistent and complicated rates: The multi-rate structure is criticized as a significant problem because it causes confusion when multiple rates are applied to similar things. Salted popcorn, for instance, is taxed differently from caramelized popcorn.

Key industries are not included in the GST, which has a cascading effect of taxes that might impact exports and be passed on to consumers. Examples of these industries are steel, cement, gasoline, and diesel.

Ongoing legal challenges: The complexity of GST has led to numerous court cases. For instance, a high court case highlighted how technicalities like an incorrect GSTIN on an invoice can lead to denial of legitimate ITC, even when the transaction is genuine.  There are also several cases between State and Central Government on revenue sharing of GST collected.

There are much too many categories: 0%, 3%, 5%, 12%, 18%, and 28%. This creates needless complexity and makes it simpler to cheat. In the past, Parachute oil was able to avoid paying minimal taxes by claiming to be a cooking product rather than a cosmetic. It will take a lot of political battle to reduce the categories, and the administration must act quickly.

Bringing in alcohol and oil: State governments don't want to lose the money they make from the substantial taxes they now impose on these substances. For such things, even the 28% tax level appears to be tiny. But it causes more misunderstanding and leaks.

Higher average tax: Overall, the GST lowers tax rates compared to earlier regimes. It is still high, though. We should lower the average tax while also requiring more people to pay taxes. It would be possible to reduce the 18% slab to 15% and unite it with the 12% slab.

Instead of 20 lakhs, the basic exemption level should have been 50 lakhs, which would have removed many small traders from the GST Net initially. India could have further lowered the restrictions as needed to make compliance easier in the beginning.

The general public is greatly impacted by the simple fact that the service tax has increased from 15% to 18% and that there are several service rates, which further confuses the community; 

Throughout the entire GST implementation process, there is a glaring lack of education and training opportunities for small traders and business owners (Singapore had engaged individuals for two years prior to GST in 1994);

81% of products are included, which is unnecessary because the majority of items used by the average person should have been excluded to facilitate implementation and acceptance by everyone. Additionally, the revenue generated will be less than the costs incurred by everyone to comply with the regulations, particularly those related to computer systems, software, labor, and expert advice;

The 75 lakhs cap should have been 1.5 Crs (like the previous excise ceiling) for a 1% flat fee, which would have prevented MSME business owners from panicking and rushing to comply immediately;

A mistake that speaks poorly of an authoritarian approach to agenda-pushing is the urgent adoption without testing the software and GSTN system with traders and businesspeople (had the BJP been concerned about the impact of GST before to the 2019 election, it should have pushed GST in 2014 instead of DeMo first);

Politicians are essentially working together to implement the GST in order to maintain state and federal revenue, disregarding consumers and compliant businesspeople (a classic example is that luxury cars and tobacco products are less expensive than packed grains and sanitary napkins);

Very inadequate training on transition regulations, as dealers and business owners with large inventories are being severely penalized for the additional expenses excluding, of course, alcohol, which accounts for 35% of revenue, and gasoline and diesel (central excise and state VAT are 58%);

Since most dealers are charging GST above MRP without reducing the pricing for input credits, with the exception of a few high-priced commodities, anti-profiteering is currently ineffective.

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

Education and Healthcare

 Education and Healthcare

Misuse of CBI Income Tax, ED and other Government Machineries

 

Misuse of CBI Income Tax, ED and other Government Machineries (Doordarshan, BSNL, ONGC)

Sohrabuddin murder case

  Sohrabuddin murder case

Judge Loya’s death,

Monday, May 26, 2025

Pahalgam attack, Operation Sindoor and Ceased fire

 

Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor:  

The 2025 Pahalgam incident occurred on April 22, 2025, when five armed terrorists attacked tourists in the Indian-administered state of Jammu and Kashmir near Pahalgam, killing 26 civilians.   India has conducted a series of attacks on locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, two weeks after a deadly militant attack on tourists in Kashmir.
According to the Indian defense ministry, the strikes, known as "Operation Sindoor," were a part of a "commitment" to make "accountable" those involved for the attack that killed 25 Indians and one Nepali person on April 22 in Pahalgam, Indian-administered Kashmir.
 

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, however, declared that the "heinous act of aggression will not go unpunished" and characterized the strikes as "unprovoked." Pakistan has denied any involvement in the incident.  On Wednesday, Sharif said that Pakistan was "accused for the wrong" reasons and that the Pahalgam incident "wasn't related" to his nation. Early on Wednesday morning, Delhi announced that nine distinct sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir had been hit. It said that these locations were "terrorist infrastructure"—areas where assaults were "planned and directed" It emphasized that its "actions have been focused, measured, and non-escalatory in nature" and that it had not struck any military installations in Pakistan. 

Pakistan claimed that three distinct locations were affected in the immediate aftermath of the attacks: Bahawalpur in the Pakistani province of Punjab, and Muzaffarabad and Kotli in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif, Pakistan's military spokesperson, subsequently stated that six targets had been struck.

Khawaja Asif, Pakistan's defense minister, told GeoTV in the early hours of Wednesday that India's assertion that the strikes were "targeting terrorist camps" was untrue and that the strikes had affected civilian areas.

26 persons were killed in a militant attack on April 22; survivors claim the militants were specifically targeting Hindu men. 

 It was the first significant assault on civilians since India repealed Article 370, which granted Kashmir semi-autonomous status, in 2019 and the worst on residents in the area in 20 years.   After the ruling, there were protests in the area, but there was also a decline in militancy and a sharp rise in tourism.   Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared that the nation would search the suspects "till the ends of the Earth" and that those responsible for the deaths "will be punished beyond their imagination" in response to the immense outrage the killings have caused in India.

At first, though, India did not identify the group it thought was responsible for the Pahalgam attack.   However, Delhi accused Pakistan of aiding extremists, a claim Islamabad refutes, and Indian authorities claimed that two of the assailants were Pakistani nationals. It claims it is unrelated to the attacks on April 22.   Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri claimed on May 7 that the incident was carried out by the Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group, which is based in Pakistan.   Both sides have taken tit-for-tat actions against one another in the two weeks that have passed, such as blocking border crossings, suspending visas, and dismissing ambassadors.  

 However, many anticipated that it would intensify into a cross-border attack, as demonstrated by the Pulwama attacks in 2019, which claimed the lives of 40 Indian paramilitary troops. 

Operation SINDOOR

Operation SINDOOR developed as a well-coordinated military reaction to a changing asymmetric warfare pattern that increasingly targets both military personnel and unarmed civilians. A sobering reminder of this change was the April 2025 terrorist attack on tourists in Pahalgam. India's reaction was calculated, accurate, and well-planned. Indian troops destroyed several threats and hit terrorist infrastructure without going across the Line of Control or the international border. But more noteworthy than tactical skill was the smooth incorporation of domestic high-tech systems into the country's defense. Operation SINDOOR is a turning point in India's military's transition to technical independence, whether in electronic warfare, drone warfare, or layered air defense.

Pakistan tried to use drones and missiles to attack several military targets in Northern and Western India on the evening of May 07–08, 2025, including Awantipura, Srinagar, Jammu, Pathankot, Amritsar, Kapurthala, Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Adampur, Bhatinda, Chandigarh, Nal, Phalodi, Uttarlai, and Bhuj.  The Integrated Counter UAS (Unmanned Aerial Systems) Grid and Air Defense systems eliminated them.

India began Operation Sindoor, a major military operation, in May 2025 in response to a terrorist attack that killed 26 civilians in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir. The goal of the operation was to destroy the operational capacities of organizations like as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed by targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK). 

Context: The Attack on Pahalgam

26 persons were killed in a terrorist attack at Pahalgam on April 22, 2025. The attack was attributed to Lashkar-e-Taiba's affiliate, the Resistance Front (TRF). Tensions between the two nations increased after India considered Pakistan responsible for aiding cross-border terrorism.

 Operation Sindoor's execution 

The Indian Armed Forces began Operation Sindoor early on May 7, 2025, carrying out pinpoint strikes on nine terrorist locations in Pakistan and PoJK. Advanced weapons were used in the operation, such as BrahMos cruise missiles, SkyStriker loitering munitions, and Rafale planes fitted with SCALP missiles and AASM Hammer glide bombs. The potential of escalation was reduced because the strikes were carried out without Indian planes entering Pakistani airspace. India's ability to carry out accurate military operations against terrorist infrastructure outside of its boundaries was shown during Operation Sindoor. The employment of domestic weaponry demonstrated the defense industry's advancement under the "Atmanirbhar Bharat" (self-reliant India) initiative.

Reactions at Home and Abroad 

In India, the operation was warmly hailed by the populace and government authorities, who showed their support for the military. The operation was viewed as a reasonable response to terrorism, and India's right to self-defense was recognized internationally.

It's interesting to note that the Indian Army was able to resist every invasion from Pakistan. India's economic and human losses were modest because of the Indian Army's vigilance. 

The weakness of Pakistan's HQ-9 air defense system was also exposed by India's operation. On May 9 and 10, 2025, India successfully attacked Pakistan's air bases, making history. In only three hours following the Pakistani assault, India bombed 11 Pakistani military locations. Rafiki, Murid, Sukkur, Sialkot, Pasrur, Chunian, Sargodha, Sakard, Bholari, Jacobabad, and Noor Khan were among them.

India published real-time satellite footage of these assaults. These images were of Jacobabad's Shahbaz Air Base. One may sense the army's accomplishments when looking at these pictures. 

Fighter jets such as the F-16 and F-17 have been stationed at Pakistani air stations Sargodha and Bholari. About 20% of the Pakistani Air Force's infrastructure has been destroyed by these Indian attacks.

On Wednesday, May 7, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri stated that the inquiry into the Pahalgam terror assault has revealed the communication channels between the attackers and their handlers in Pakistan. 

Misri also emphasized that India had warned the UN's monitoring body as early as 2023 that the group claiming responsibility was a front for Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) during a press briefing hours after "Operation Sindoor," which involved India's military strikes against "terrorist infrastructure" in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

===

India claimed that the aerial intrusions may have been carried out to "test air defense systems" during a joint press conference with Indian Army Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, Indian Air Force Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, and Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri. However, an initial analysis of the drone debris brought by India revealed that the drones were Turkish Asisguard Songar drones.

Pakistan used intense artillery bombardment along the International Border (IB) and Line of Control (LoC) throughout the night of May 9 and May 10, raising fears of several casualties in Jammu and Kashmir.

Pakistan targeted the Rajouri area bordering the LoC in Jammu with heavy artillery fire, killing a top government official. Overnight shelling in Rajouri also reportedly killed a 35-year-old man and a little daughter from Bihar.

Pakistan attacks homes belonging to the Sikh community in J&K and a Gurdwara in Poonch.  There have been reported deaths, including the Gurdwara's religious musician. Using mortar and heavy-caliber artillery, Pakistan also intensifies unprovoked shooting across the Line of Control in the J&K, India, sectors of Kupwara, Baramulla, Uri, Poonch, Mendhar, and Rajouri.  By May 8, this causes 59 injuries and 16 civilian fatalities in India.

On 10th May. 2025 Pakistan has been intensifying and agitating India over the past few days, and this has resumed early on Saturday as well, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said during a press briefing at 10.30 a.m.  During the press briefing, Wing Commander Vyomika Singh and Colonel Sofia Qureshi stated that Pakistan was also using "multiple threat vectors" to target both military and civilian facilities throughout the Western border.  Although India was able to contain the damage from 26 attempted air intrusions, certain troops and equipment at the air force facilities in Udhampur, Pathankot, Adampur, and Bhuj suffered some damage.

Ceasefire - May 10

US President Donald Trump declared today (May 10) that India and Pakistan have reached an agreement on a “full and immediate ceasefire” following a tense four-day military standoff that involved drone and missile strikes. 

Most people were relieved by his remark, which was quickly echoed by officials in Islamabad and New Delhi. However, other people were also alarmed. However, the fragility of this US-mediated peace attempt was brought to light by explosions heard throughout the Kashmir valley as darkness fell on the subcontinent.

"After a long night of talks mediated by the United States, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed to a FULL AND IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE," Trump wrote on Truth Social at approximately 7:55 a.m. eastern time.  He commended both nations for applying "Great Intelligence and Common Sense."

 Pakistan's deputy prime minister and foreign minister, M. Ishaq Dar, posted on X that the neighbors had "agreed to a ceasefire with immediate effect," confirming the truce in a swift manner.

The two nations have "worked out an understanding on stoppage of firing and military action," according to a later post by S. Jaishankar, the minister of external affairs. India has continuously maintained a strong and unyielding stance against terrorism in all of its forms and manifestations, he noted. It will keep doing so. 

Interestingly, neither Jaishankar's remarks nor India's previous declaration by Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri admitted that the US had mediated the truce. But in a State Department statement, Washington clearly referred to it as a “US-brokered ceasefire”.

He wrote on X, "We have accepted this outcome in the interest of regional peace and stability, and we appreciate the United States for facilitating it."  "As a responsible nation, we have responded positively for the suggestion of a ceasefire," he stated in a speech to the nation at 1135 IST.  "We are hopeful that the issue of Jammu and Kashmir and all outstanding issues will be resolved through negotiations," he said, thanking Trump, "who played a vital role in the ceasefire," as well as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Qatar, the United Kingdom, and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has refrained from making public remarks regarding Operation Sindoor since its inception, also said nothing about the deal that India and Pakistan came to.  

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in his first address to the nation after US President Donald Trump said he had brokered a ceasefire between India and Pakistan, said that India had inflicted so much damage on Pakistan’s air bases and military establishments that its DGMO, on the afternoon of May 10, called up his Indian counterpart to ensure the Indian military would not take further action.

Modi also said that no “nuclear blackmail will be tolerated anymore” and reiterated his government’s stated policy that “talks and terror cannot go hand in hand”.

Modi's speech followed widespread online and offline protests against the ceasefire announcement from a sizable portion of his supporters.  Even Vikram Misri, the foreign secretary who led the government briefings and provided details of Operation Sindoor throughout the four-day stalemate, was so severely mocked by his supporters that he was forced to keep his X handle confidential.

During Modi's speech, US President Donald Trump also stated that he has warned India and Pakistan that unless the escalation stops, the US will not be doing business with any nation.  He also asserted that he had prevented nuclear war.

Although such mediation was not mentioned in Prime Minister Narendra Modi's first speech to the country following US President Donald Trump's assertion that he had mediated a ceasefire between India and Pakistan, opposition parties have questioned his silence on Trump's claims.  Given India's long-standing policy of no third-party mediation after the Simla Agreement, opposition parties have questioned if the truce was the product of US mediation.

Opposition parties have called for answers on why Modi said nothing in response to Trump's allegations, whether India had altered its long-standing policy of bilateral dispute resolution and no third-party mediation, and whether the US president's assertions that commerce was being used to settle the conflict were accurate.

The opposition's demand for a special session of parliament was reaffirmed by Communist Party of India (Marxist) general secretary M.A. Baby in a letter to Modi. He also stated that the ceasefire announcement, which was initially made by Trump on Saturday night without any Indian officials' involvement, "has raised serious concerns." 

Our nation has made it a stated policy to resolve disagreements amicably, without the involvement of a third party. Therefore, the highest echelons of our government must provide a clear and authoritative explanation of this circumstance," he wrote in his letter.

On the evening of May 12, Narendra Modi appeared on television and informed the public that Pakistan had pleaded for a ceasefire and that India had given in since it had already destroyed terrorist infrastructure and Islamabad had pledged to behave going forward. 

During a press meeting at the White House, Donald Trump said that he had threatened to halt commerce with Pakistan and India if they did not accept a truce, and they did. At first, he characterized both nations as "unwavering." "C'mon," I said. We will engage in a great deal of trading with you all. Let us put an end to it. Stop it, and we'll trade.

On Thursday, May 15, Kunwar Vijay Shah, the leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), filed a case in the Supreme Court contesting the Madhya Pradesh high court's judgment that ordered him to be held accountable for his comments about Colonel Sofiya Qureshi.



 

 

 

 


 

Thursday, May 22, 2025

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025

 

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025

Waqf: This Arabic-derived phrase refers to the "permanent dedication" of property for philanthropic or religious reasons.

The Waqf Board is in charge of overseeing and managing waqf properties.

Functions:

  • Managing and safeguarding waqf assets are among the board's primary duties.
  • Ensuring that waqf money is used appropriately and for the intended purpose.
  • Directing the upkeep and restoration of waqf properties.
  • Settling disagreements about waqf property.

=== 

In India, the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, has sparked intense legal and political discussions. Critics contend that the modifications violate the Muslim community's property and religious rights, despite the government's claims that the amendments are intended to improve openness

And efficiency in the admin of Walf properties.

Important Aspects of the 2025 Waqf (Amendment) Act

1. Redefinition of Waqf Dedication: According to the Act, property can only be dedicated as Waqf by those who have been Muslims for at least five years. This raises questions regarding inclusion and religious freedom because it replaces the previous clause that let anyone to make such a commitment.
 

2. District Collector Empowerment: The amendment gives district collectors the right to decide if a property is Waqf.  The move from Waqf Boards to government-appointed representatives, according to critics, may result in abuse and political meddling. 

 3. Inclusion of Non-Muslim Members in Waqf Boards: The Act includes a clause allowing non-Muslims to serve on Waqf Boards, a move that has drawn criticism for perhaps compromising these organizations' religious autonomy. ([Wikipedia][3]) 

 4. 'Waqf by User' is removed Recognition: Many historical sites without official documentation may be impacted by the amendment's removal of the recognition of properties created as Waqf through customary usage. ([[Indian Times][4]?)

--- 

Government's Justification 

The central government defends the amendments as necessary for:([The Times of India][2]) 

Enhancing Transparency: By digitizing records and streamlining management processes to prevent misuse of Waqf properties . 

Preventing Unauthorized Claims: Ensuring that only legitimate claims are recognized, thereby protecting public and private lands from being wrongfully designated as Waqf.

--- 

Opposition and Civil Society Concerns: 

Opposition parties, legal experts, and civil society groups have raised several concerns:

 

1. Erosion of Minority Rights: The Act is perceived as infringing upon the constitutional rights of Muslims to manage their religious endowments autonomously.

 

2. Potential for State Overreach: Granting administrative officials authority over Waqf properties could lead to arbitrary decisions and politicization of religious assets. Undermining Religious Practices: The removal of 'Waqf by User' recognition may disregard longstanding religious practices and historical endowments lacking formal documentation.

 

3. There are some lands or properties owned by the Waqf Board that is occupied by the State or Central Government or transferred without knowledge of Waqf Board, to the private owners or builders, forcefully.

Legal Challenges and Protests: 

The Act has been challenged in the Supreme Court, with petitioners arguing that it facilitates a non-judicial takeover of Waqf properties and undermines legal oversight . Prominent lawyer Kapil Sibal contended that the law is designed to strip Muslims of their religious rights over Waqf .

 

Nationwide protests have erupted, with organizations like the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and political parties such as the Congress expressing strong opposition. In Murshidabad, West Bengal, protests turned violent, resulting in fatalities and prompting the deployment of central forces.

  

Conclusion:

 

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, represents a significant shift in the management of religious endowments in India. While the government emphasizes administrative efficiency and transparency, critics view the amendments as a threat to the religious autonomy and rights of the Muslim community. The Supreme Court's forthcoming judgment will be pivotal in determining the balance between state oversight and minority rights in the context of religious endowments. 

===

Petitioners on 21.05.2025, referred to the new law as a "creeping acquisition" of waqf properties owned by the Muslim community, India's largest religious minority group, in response to the Supreme Court's ruling that a parliamentary statute such as the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 enjoys a presumption of constitutionality. 

To catch waqfs, the 2025 amendments are a charade.  Through a legislative decree, the government can purchase property without having to pay compensation, which is customary in acquisition situations.  Senior counsel Kapil Sibal said that these revisions "blatantly violate the rights of a minority community under Article 25 (freedom of religion)." 

To catch waqfs, the 2025 amendments are a charade. Through a legislative decree, the government can purchase property without having to pay compensation, which is customary in acquisition situations. The rights of a minority population under Article 25 (freedom of religion) are clearly violated by these revisions, according to senior counsel Kapil Sibal.

Mr. Sibal pointed out that Section 3C of the 2025 Act allowed any intruder to initiate a dispute. A appointed officer—a government employee or "agent of the government"—would investigate the disagreement.
 

He also mentioned how the inclusion of non-Muslims in waqf administrative organizations results in the "subordination" of Muslim members.  He drew attention to the fact that neither Sikh nor Hindu endowments permitted members of other religions to operate their gurudwaras or temples.

Senior counsel A.M. Singhvi contended that the protection granted to religious waqfs under the Places of Worship Act, 1991, would be impacted by the "superimposition" of ancient monument legislation on them.

Additionally, he made errors in the Center's affidavit that cited the exponential growth of waqf properties. He said that it was because the website, which had only been made in 2013, had been updated.

An attorney from Chennai has petitioned the Supreme Court to get involved in the current hearing on cases contesting the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.

In his intervention plea, advocate H. Mohamed Ismail defended the controversial law. According to him, waqf is fundamentally secular and not limited to religious uses as it is conceived in the Holy Quran and Hadith.

 



Friday, May 16, 2025

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and Hindenburg report

 

SEBI, the Securities and Exchange Board of India

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), which was founded in 1992 with the goals of safeguarding investors and promoting market growth, is the main regulatory organization for the Indian securities industry. It is essential to maintaining equitable and effective operations in the Indian capital market. Market participant regulation, insider trading prevention, investor protection, and securities market development are among SEBI's primary responsibilities.

The role and functions of SEBI:

Protecting Investors: Maintaining Transparency

According to Scripbox, SEBI requires businesses to give investors accurate and timely information about their operations and financial performance.

Preventing Fraud: According to Bajaj Finserv, SEBI looks into and sanctions anyone involved in fraudulent practices like insider trading and market manipulation.

Resolving Conflicts: According to Bajaj Finserv, SEBI offers a forum for investors to file complaints against market intermediaries and settles conflicts between investors and intermediaries.

===

Questionable Inconsistencies and Reactions to SEBI

Despite having a broad scope, SEBI has frequently come under fire for purported anomalies and dubious rulings.  Among the more contentious instances are:

1. The story of Adani-Hindenburg

Hindenburg Research, a U.S.-based firm, charged the Adani Group with accounting fraud and market manipulation in the beginning of 2023.  Concerns were expressed regarding SEBI's tardiness in looking into the conglomerate in spite of earlier warnings.  The effectiveness of SEBI's oversight of major corporate groups was questioned by some.

2. Inaction in Cases of Insider Trading

Concerns regarding transparency and enforcement bias have been raised by a number of journalists and whistleblowers who have brought attention to instances in which SEBI failed to act promptly on insider trading.

3. Dealing with Scams in Mutual Funds

Thousands of investors were shocked by the abrupt closure of six debt schemes during the 2020 Franklin Templeton fund crisis.  SEBI came under fire for its tardy regulatory action as a result of its delaying intervention.

4. Regulatory Overreach Alleged

There are rising worries that SEBI occasionally overreaches in minor cases while seeming to be forgiving of bigger, politically connected companies.  Investor trust is impacted by this mismatch.

Later on Friday, February 28, 2025, Madhabi Puri Buch, India's first female SEBI chief who was accused of having a conflict of interest by U.S.-based short seller Hindenburg and who later faced political backlash, will finish her three-year term. Finance Secretary Tuhin Kanta Pandey will succeed her. Madhabi Puri Buch became the first woman to manage SEBI when she took office on March 2, 2022, for a three-year tenure. She took over for Ajay Tyagi, who was in office from March 2017 to February 2022, a period of five years.

The Bombay High Court (HC) on 25.04.2025 extended the interim stay on a special court’s order that had directed the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against former Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and five other officials over alleged stock market fraud and regulatory violations. 

The HC had initially granted the interim stay last month, observing that the special court’s order appeared to have been passed mechanically without assigning any specific role to the accused. 

On Tuesday, Justice Shivkumar Dige noted that the original complainant had filed an affidavit in the case and granted time to Buch and the other accused to examine it. “The interim relief granted earlier shall continue until further orders,” Justice Dige said, adjourning the matter to May 7 for further hearing.

===

Why she has been scrutinized or blamed for irregularities:

1. The Adani-Hindenburg Debate

The Adani organization issue, which was brought on by Hindenburg Research's 2023 research accusing the organization of stock manipulation and accounting fraud, was one of the most intense periods of scrutiny.

Why Buch and SEBI were held accountable:

Opponents asserted that SEBI was aware of odd trading trends in Adani stocks beforehand. There were claims that the start of a thorough investigation was delayed. The incapacity (or unwillingness) of SEBI to identify the real ownership of foreign portfolio investors in Adani-affiliated companies was questioned.  Additionally, the Supreme Court of India requested reports and an explanation from SEBI.

2. Selective Enforcement Allegations

Some investors and industry insiders have accused Madhabi Buch's SEBI of being tolerant toward huge firms or politically sensitive groups while aggressively targeting smaller entities. For instance, taking harsh measures against smaller brokerages and fintech startups while appearing tentative towards larger corporate companies.

3. Issues with Adjudication and Transparency

According to several detractors, SEBI's adjudication procedures have not been transparent under Buch's direction. There is a perception of selective treatment or regulatory passivity when high-profile investigations are delayed.

4. Internal Whistle-blower Warnings

In multiple cases, internal whistleblowers or independent analysts have claimed that warnings were ignored or not acted upon swiftly.

 ===

In January 2023, the Adani Group, headed by Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, was accused of grave financial and corporate malfeasance in a study published by Hindenburg Research, a U.S.-based investment research business that specializes in producing findings on corporate fraud. Below is a synopsis of the main accusations that Hindenburg made:

 Hindenburg's Principal Charges Against Adani Group: 

 1. Manipulation of Stock Prices:

Hindenburg asserted that the Adani Group used a network of offshore shell corporations run by Gautam Adani's friends and family to manipulate stocks. In order to fraudulently raise their pricing, these entities reportedly exchanged Adani stocks. 

2. Inconsistencies in Accounting:

According to the investigation, the group was hiding debt and altering results through false accounting methods and inadequate disclosures. 

 3. Excessive Debt:

The group's high debt was questioned by Hindenburg, who also cautioned that a number of Adani enterprises were on "precarious financial footing."    It claimed that borrowed funds drove the group's growth, endangering investors.

 4. Utilizing Offshore Organizations:

Allegedly, funds were transferred back into Adani Group equities through more than 30 shell corporations in Mauritius and other tax havens.   According to the research, these entities were connected to members of the Adani family. 

5. Stock Overvaluation:

 According to the research, Adani's listed businesses were overpriced by over 85%, leaving them open to a market correction. 

 Effects of the Charges

The story caused the stock market to plummet, wiping off the market value of the Adani Group by more than $100 billion at the moment. Adani Group vehemently refuted every accusation, describing the study as vicious and deceptive. They also charged Hindenburg with attempting to damage India's reputation and focusing on Indian businesses in order to make money from short sales.

 



Monday, May 12, 2025

Defense services—one rank one pension- recruitment

 

Defense services—one rank one pension -recruitment

1. The power forces have 1,22,555 open positions!  The Ministry of Defense informed Parliament on December 13, 2021, that there are 1,22,555 open positions throughout the three services, with roughly 10,000 of those positions being for military officers.  It is intolerable that the Modi government would make fun of the nation's security.

2. 30 lakh ex-servicemen were defrauded of their "One Rank, One Pension."  The UPA-Congress administration announced directives on February 17, 2014, granting "One Rank, One Pension" effective April 1, 2014.  30–40% of the army's soldiers were deprived of their "One Rank, One Pension" when the Modi government issued a new directive on November 7, 2015.  According to the directive, military members in these three services who voluntarily retired after July 1, 2014, would not be eligible for "One Rank, One Pension."  Knowing that the majority of army members retire after 17–18 years of service by the time they turn 40, the conspiracy against the army was carried out.They will not get the benefit of ‘One Rank, One Pension’. It is also true that 85% of the service personnel retire by the age of 38 and 10% by the age of 46 (Para 9 (iii). 

3. The ECHS facilities were attacked! The ECHS funding is being progressively reduced by the Modi administration. The ECHS funding for ex-servicemen has been reduced by Rs. 1,990 crores even in the current year 2021–2022, compared to the year before. View the chart below:
4. GST is applied and there are limitations on what may be purchased at the CSD canteen! The Modi administration has prohibited officers and troops from purchasing consumer products at CSD canteens, with a monthly cap of Rs. 10,000. From a CSD canteen, soldiers will no longer be allowed to purchase items valued at more than this.  In the year 2017, the Government has also decided that GST at the rate of 50% will have to be paid at the goods sold in CSD canteens. It is to be known that before the implementation of GST in provinces like Punjab, Haryana, Uttarakhand, VAT was completely waived on CSD canteens.
 

5. The Modi government taxed soldiers' "disability pensions"!  A courageous soldier who suffers an injury while serving his nation and retires early is eligible for disability benefits.  Beginning on June 24, 2019, the cruel Modi administration also levied taxes on soldiers' disability pensions.

 6. Military commanders were refused treatment at Military Hospital by the "Short Service Commission."  Through the "Short Service Commission," thousands of army officers, both male and female, serve the nation.  The military hospital provided these officers with lifelong treatment services.  The free treatment of short service commission men and women officers in military hospitals has been outlawed by the Modi administration.  They were required to receive outside therapy and only receive half of the money on a reimbursement basis.

7. Paramilitary forces are treated like stepmothers!  The Modi administration refused to grant the title of "Martyr" to the paramilitary forces, CRPF, BSF, ITBP, CISF, SSB, Coast Guard, and others whose members gave their lives in defense of the nation.  As a result, the family was unable to obtain a government position or adequate compensation.  All retired officers of the CRPF, BSF, ITBP, CISF, SSB, and Coast Guard should be granted all the benefits of ex-servicemen, just like all three armed forces, according to orders issued by the Congress government on November 23, 2012, designating all paramilitary forces as "Ex-Central Armed Police Forces Personnel."  However, it was disregarded by both the central Modi government and the regional BJP governments. More than 1800 Central Police canteens cater to 10 lakh serving personnel of paramilitary forces and their families of around 50 lakhs. 

==

1. The power forces have 1,22,555 open positions!  The Ministry of Defense informed Parliament on December 13, 2021, that there are 1,22,555 open positions throughout the three services, with roughly 10,000 of those positions being for military officers. It is intolerable that the Government would make fun of the nation's security.

2. 30 lakh ex-servicemen were defrauded of their "One Rank, One Pension." The UPA-Congress administration announced directives on February 17, 2014, granting "One Rank, One Pension" effective April 1, 2014. 30–40% of the army's soldiers were deprived of their "One Rank, One Pension" when the government issued a new directive on November 7, 2015. According to the directive, military members in these three services who voluntarily retired after July 1, 2014, would not be eligible for "One Rank, One Pension." Knowing that the majority of army members retire after 17–18 years of service by the time they turn 40, the conspiracy against the army was carried out.They will not get the benefit of ‘One Rank, One Pension’. It is also true that 85% of the service personnel retire by the age of 38 and 10% by the age of 46 (Para 9 (iii).

3. The ECHS facilities were attacked! The ECHS funding is being progressively reduced by the government administration. The ECHS funding for ex-servicemen has been reduced by Rs. 1,990 crores even in the current year, 2021–2022, compared to the year before. View the chart below:
4. GST is applied, and there are limitations on what may be purchased at the CSD canteen! The government administration has prohibited officers and troops from purchasing consumer products at CSD canteens, with a monthly cap of Rs. 10,000. From a CSD canteen, soldiers will no longer be allowed to purchase items valued at more than this. In the year 2017, the government has also decided that GST at the rate of 50% will have to be paid at the goods sold in CSD canteens. It is to be known that before the implementation of GST in provinces like Punjab, Haryana, and Uttarakhand, VAT was completely waived on CSD canteens.
 

5. The government has taxed soldiers' "disability pensions"!  A courageous soldier who suffers an injury while serving his nation and retires early is eligible for disability benefits.  Beginning on June 24, 2019, the cruel Government also levied taxes on soldiers' disability pensions.

 6. Military commanders were refused treatment at Military Hospital by the "Short Service Commission." Through the "Short Service Commission," thousands of army officers, both male and female, serve the nation.  The Military Hospital provided these officers with lifelong treatment services. The free treatment of short service commission men and women officers in military hospitals has been outlawed by the government administration. They were required to receive outside therapy and only receive half of the money on a reimbursement basis.

7. Paramilitary forces are treated like stepmothers!  The Government administration refused to grant the title of "Martyr" to the paramilitary forces, CRPF, BSF, ITBP, CISF, SSB, Coast Guard, and others whose members gave their lives in defense of the nation.  As a result, the family was unable to obtain a government position or adequate compensation.  All retired officers of the CRPF, BSF, ITBP, CISF, SSB, and Coast Guard should be granted all the benefits of ex-servicemen, just like all three armed forces, according to orders issued by the Congress government on November 23, 2012, designating all paramilitary forces as "Ex-Central Armed Police Forces Personnel."  However, it was disregarded by both the central Government and the regional BJP governments. More than 1800 Central Police canteens cater to 10 lakh serving personnel of paramilitary forces and their families of around 50 lakhs. 

===


Election process and EVM in India

 

Election process and EVM in India

The main point of disagreement between the winning and losing teams has always been the EVM machine and VVPAT.  Democracy is practiced in roughly 120 nations.  Only roughly 25 of them have experimented with or elected their governments using electronic voting machines.   According to a US cyber specialist, devices can be compromised.   At an event today, the cyber specialist will demonstrate live EVM hacking.   When it was in opposition, even the BJP questioned the legitimacy of these machines.

The first resolution addressed EVM and VVPAT counting, stating that it is acknowledged that voting and counting solely based on EVMs do not adhere to "democracy principles," which demand that every voter be able to confirm that their vote was cast as intended, recorded as cast, and counted as recorded.   They asserted that it is not reasonable to presume that electronic voting machines (EVMs) are impenetrable. To make the voting process verifiable or auditable, it should be modified to be independent of both hardware and software.

It is necessary to redesign the voter verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) mechanism in order to make it completely voter-verified.  For a vote to be legitimate and counted, the voter must be able to obtain the VVPAT slip and place it in a ballot box without chips, according to the resolution.    It is claimed that the chip's software is essential to anyone attempting to rig elections using electronic voting machines.   It is preferable to use ballot papers if the Indian people is dubious about the EVM election so they may be sufficiently sure that the government they have chosen to govern the nation is their choice.

 

Discrepancy in number of votes polled and votes counted in 538 constituencies in Lok Sabha polls: ADR said.

Report claims 5 crore vote discrepancy, INDIA bloc would have won maximum seats in Lok Sabha Congress said.

Citing a report, Congress alleged a discrepancy of nearly 5 crore votes between the initial and final counts of the Lok Sabha polls, which they claim would have given the INDIA bloc the most seats in Parliament. This claim is based on a report titled 'Report: Conduct of Lok Sabha Elections 2024', released by 'Vote for Democracy.' A discrepancy of nearly 5 crores votes between the initial votes counted and the final votes counted," Pawan Khera said in a post on X.

A report by *Vote for Democracy* titled “Conduct of Lok Sabha Elections 2024” has made some shocking revelations that can shake the trust of people in our democracy. The report claims the following:

A discrepancy of nearly 5 crores votes between the initial votes counted and the final votes counted.

The report claims that a minimum of 79 seats in 15 states could have been won by the NDA/BJP through the hike in the votes, implying that if true, the INDIA alliance would have the maximum seats in the parliament.

The ECI delayed the publication of final voter turnout throughout the 7 phases, which again raises serious concerns.   If the report is incorrect, @ECISVEEP must clarify its stance on it and restore the faltering faith of the people in the democratic process. But if what is said in the report is true, then the political history of Indian democracy is seeing its turning point.

Massive addition and deletion of Voters could significantly Alter Election Outcomes. A Similar Strategy has been used in the Elections of  $Delhi, #Haryana and #Maharashtra.

Voter roll manipulation:  A few weeks ago, the AAP had uncovered this foul play, alleging that the BJP submitted applications to @ECISVEEP  to delete 5%-8% of votes in several constituencies while also.

Journalist #Ashok-Wankhede revealed in the Maharashtra elections around 230 seats have been rigged.  While counting, Form 17c and EVM were not matching at many booths and seals of many EVMs were broken.  There was never a BJP wave in Maharashtra.

Voter Id and Voters cards of other States in the State where election is taking place

Voter Id and Voters cards of the State should match with Voter list of the State, but after voting voter id of other states, were found in the list.

Congress complained and said it has generated fake voters (same EPIC number in different states) to ensure BJP wins in Loksabha elections and recently concluded state elections.


Esrael and Iran War

  Esrael and Iran War: Korean War:  US President Harry Truman framed the 1950 aggression as ensuring collective security, but the conflict e...