For now, Greater Bengaluru unlikely to go beyond BBMP limits
: The govt is all set to put on hold the move to expand Bengaluru's civic area to 1,000-plus sqkm by including peripheral villages within the jurisdiction of the proposed
Greater Bengaluru Authority
(GBA). Instead, it will retain the current extent of 709 sqkm.
The state cabinet, which will meet Friday, is expected to discuss the matter with a decision on the date of implementation of Greater
Bengaluru Governance Act-2024
, which was notified on April 24. Following the passing of the new legislation, delineation of GBA's boundaries had come up for discussion, with many villages on the outskirts of the city expressing interest in getting detached from gram panchayats and being included within the city civic body's jurisdiction.
The
BBMP
Restructuring Committee, in its first interim report, had suggested the GBA area cover 1,307 sqkm (including BBMP and BDA areas). The committee led by MLA Rizwan Arshad, which submitted the latest report on restructuring Bengaluru city administration, spoke about creating new corporations to govern while not specifying the proposed extent of the city's civic area.
Following this, several legislators in the city and Bengaluru Rural district submitted suggestions seeking the inclusion of some villages into Bengaluru. That had a ripple effect on the realty sector with land prices shooting up in villages on the city's periphery in anticipation of becoming an integral part of Bengaluru's civic administrative system. However, the proposed inclusion and expansion of GBA area will not happen immediately.
A source said: "Initially, the existing BBMP limits will be considered as the jurisdiction of Greater Bengaluru. In future, decisions will be made regarding the inclusion of gram panchayats and towns on the city's outskirts." Although there were proposals to create three city corporations for more efficient governance, the final decision rests with the govt.
The govt notified Greater Bengaluru Governance Act-2024 on April 24, which outlines a three-tier civic governance system consisting of Greater Bengaluru Authority, city corporations and ward committees. The Act allows for the formation of up to seven city corporations.
In fact, the opposition BJP had criticised the govt's move to form Greater Bengaluru, calling it a strategy to centralise power and influence the upcoming civic body elections. For over four-and-a-half years, BBMP has been functioning without an elected body, and while the Congress govt promised that the city will be governed by an elected body once Greater Bengaluru comes into existence, the timeline for this remains unclear.
On holding elections for newly formed Greater Bengaluru, the source said, "There are proposals to trifurcate BBMP limits into three civic corporations. Once formed, elections to the new local bodies are likely to happen by the year-end. Prior to deciding on the elections, there are many modalities that need to be completed which include jurisdiction of the wards, reservation and others."
On other hand, BJP has already explored legal options to hold civic elections as per the BBMP Act by approaching the court and plans to challenge GBA's formation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
7 minutes ago
- The Print
Arrest of Khadse's son-in-law in drugs case suspicious: Sanjay Raut
The former Maharashtra minister's home was attacked to shut his mouth, he said in an apparent reference to Khadse. Talking to reporters in New Delhi, Raut dubbed the arrest of Khadse's son-in-law Pranjal Khewalkar as suspicious and also slammed the ruling BJP, alleging it was 'targeting' family members of political rivals and maligning them. Mumbai, Jul 28 (PTI) A day after the arrest of Eknath Khadse's son-in-law in a drugs case, Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut on Monday claimed the former Maharashtra minister was being targeted for linking BJP leader Girish Mahajan with an alleged honey trap scandal. Pranjal Khewalkar, the husband of Eknath Khadse's daughter Rohini Khadse, was arrested along with six others after the police raided a 'drug party' at an apartment in Pune in the early hours of Sunday and claimed to have seized narcotics, hookah set ups and liquor from there. Rohini Khadse is the state head of the NCP (SP) women's wing. 'The entire matter is suspicious,' Raut said. 'Khadse has been talking about honey traps for the last three days. He is talking about the involvement of (state cabinet minister) Girish Mahajan in this but there is no probe related to it. Now that Khadse is talking, his son-in-law has been arrested,' the Rajya Sabha member said. Such incidents were occurring everywhere in Maharashtra, Raut said. He also accused the police of having become a servant and targeting those who speak against the government. Mahajan recently accused Khadse of trying to malign his image by raising baseless allegations in connection with an alleged honeytrap scandal. The fight between Khadse, a BJP veteran who quit the party to join the then undivided NCP in 2020, and Mahajan is not new. Both belong to the Jalgaon district. 'We followed a principle that family members (of political rivals) were never dragged. Unfortunately, people from the BJP are now targeting family members, maligning them,' Raut charged. He claimed that after the arrest of Khadse's son-in-law, Mahajan was just short of breaking into a dance. NCP leader and former minister Nawab Malik's son-in-law was arrested in a similar NDPS (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act case and so was actor Shahrukh Khan's son Aryan Khan, Raut pointed out. PTI PR GK This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Mint
11 minutes ago
- Mint
India's Income Tax law revision: Why well begun is still only half done
Ketan Dalal The draft of India's 2025 Income Tax Bill simplifies the language of the complex 1961 Act. This is welcome. But the effort must not end there. We also need changes that go beyond form to address key aspects of substance. Given the Simplification Committee's mandate, it has done well to simplify the law's language, but at least some structural changes are needed. Gift this article There has been significant press coverage of India's Income Tax Bill, 2025, which was introduced in Parliament on 21 July. As readers would recall, a committee was set up in October 2024 for the simplification of the Income Tax Act; the panel's mandate was ring-fenced to simplification of language, reduction of litigation and the compliance burden, and the removal of redundant or obsolete provisions. In that sense, the committee was restrained by its limited mandate. There has been significant press coverage of India's Income Tax Bill, 2025, which was introduced in Parliament on 21 July. As readers would recall, a committee was set up in October 2024 for the simplification of the Income Tax Act; the panel's mandate was ring-fenced to simplification of language, reduction of litigation and the compliance burden, and the removal of redundant or obsolete provisions. In that sense, the committee was restrained by its limited mandate. A Lok Sabha Select Committee was set up to look at the draft Income Tax Bill framed by the Simplification Committee, which has submitted its report with 285 recommendations, a majority of which seem to find favour with the government; the net result is that the bill framed by the simplification panel will likely be passed into law with some changes. However, there are some key aspects that need to be discussed. The Income Tax Act of 1961 has been amended dozens of times, and with some 4,000 amendments, its language had turned complex; in this context, the simplification panel has made a good attempt to offer clarity. For example, several tables and explanations have been added and the number of sections has been brought down from 819 to 516. However, there are concerns over several aspects; for example, there has been a tendency to delegate rule-making to the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT)—like in the case of faceless assessments—whereby, compared to existing provisions, the CBDT would gain greater scope to make legislative -type changes without parliamentary oversight. This is worrisome. There are apparent errors and omissions in the existing law that should have been corrected. For example, in the context of the 'deemed gift' provision u/s 56(2)(x), the definition of 'relative' for tax exemption does not expressly include reciprocity, or whether the relationship is mutually applicable for gifting; this aspect should have been explicitly clarified (even under the existing law, the CDBT should have issued such a circular). It impacts gifting between taxpayers and nephews, for example, if the tax exemption for relatives applies only one-way. Also, the tax neutrality provision for a 'demerger' does not include 'fast track demerger,' because that concept came later. Representations were received by the Select Committee and both these aspects were pointed out to the ministry, but were apparently brushed aside; surprisingly, the common-sense point that relationships should be reciprocal (or two-way) was met with a response from the ministry that this is 'in the nature of a major policy change"! Although the Committee's mandate was limited, the larger concern is that once the bill is enacted, the government would be reluctant to make substantive changes. Here are some we badly need. Individual taxation: The limit of annual income beyond which the maximum tax rate kicks in is only ₹ 15 lakh, which seems too low and needs to be addressed. Also, medical expenses have gone through the roof in the last few years, as have education costs; both these are critical, and even relatively well-off Indians are struggling to meet these costs. The bill should allow a higher deduction for mediclaim and medical expenses and provide for a meaningful deduction for education (the latter could help address the skill gaps we face). Real estate costs have also shot up, while the deduction of interest on housing loans is too low at ₹ 2 lakh per year. This badly needs an upward revision. Corporate taxation: India's corporate tax rate is very reasonable at 25%; however, some aspects that need to be addressed relate to mergers and acquisitions (M&As), including group restructuring. Some specific aspects that could be looked at even at this stage have been long-standing demands. The definition of a 'demerger' for tax neutrality is highly restrictive and needs rationalization. The commercial reality of M&A transactions involves earn-outs and deferred amounts, and the Act does not have contemporary provisions on the year of taxability, which causes uncertainty and litigation. Losses of merging companies are allowed to be carried forward only in restricted circumstances, primarily if the merging company is in manufacturing; this is a relic from a bygone era, since several service companies also have losses and the mergers of such companies could save them from extinction and prevent job losses. India's problem of non-performing assets has reduced but is still substantial. In the context of takeovers that emerge from the official bankruptcy process, the provision in Section 28 that makes write-backs of haircuts taken by lenders taxable is a major dampener from the perspective of an acquirer that seeks to reduce its risk of acquiring an insolvent company to resurrect. The last two aspects have again been pointed out to the ministry, which appears not to see merit in these changes. Also Read: India's Income Tax Bill sets the stage for significant reforms Administrative dimensions: There have been simplifications in Tax Collected at Source (TCS) and Tax Deducted at Source (TDS), but the larger issue is that the deductor of tax is doing the government's job; from an Ease of Doing Business perspective, TDS provisions need to be shrunk, as opposed to language being simplified. Also, given the need to reduce tax litigation, a robust advance ruling mechanism needs to be put in place, so that tax disputes can be addressed upfront; all advance ruling mechanisms till now have failed, either because of faulty architecture or elongated time frames (or both), making the term 'advance' seem meaningless. Given the Simplification Committee's mandate, it has done well to simplify the law's language, but unfortunately, that's about form rather than substance; the issues outlined above still need to be addressed in the context of India's avowed intent to ease business. At least some structural changes are needed. A redraft of our tax law is useful and attractive, no doubt, but would be disappointing if it falls short of dealing with fundamental issues. The author is managing director, Katalyst Advisors Pvt Ltd. Topics You May Be Interested In
Indian Express
34 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Gurgaon environmentalist moves NGT over alleged encroachment, illegal constructions by temple trust in Sector 54
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) Monday sought the response of the Centre, the Haryana government, the State pollution control board, and a temple trust in connection with alleged environmental violations in the Aravallis at Sector 54 in Gurgaon. The matter, which will next be heard on October 29, deals with alleged illegal constructions and encroachment by the Kholi-waale Baba Temple Trust at Haiderpur Viran, behind Suncity. The applicant, Vaishali Rana, Trustee, Aravallis Bachao, moved the Principal Bench of the NGT at New Delhi claiming that the encroachments not only threaten fragile ecological zones but also contravene legal mandates restricting any non-forest activities on notified forest land. She has sought the removal of encroachments attributed to the temple trust, restoration of the demarcated forest area to its original state, and a direction to the relevant authorities to ensure that no further encroachment or construction is permitted at the site. The petition also asks for directions for periodic monitoring and enforcement to prevent recurrence. 'The illegal constructions, borewells, road laying, and concretisation of natural features within the Aravalli forest area are in blatant violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900 … encroachment on Protected Forest Land like expansion of the temple complex, cemented parking, metal sheds, and reconstruction of the road amount to illegal encroachment on protected forest land, which is impermissible under applicable forest and land preservation statutes,' the petitioner pointed out. The destruction of natural drainage and groundwater recharge systems due to the complete concretisation of a natural stormwater creek has also been flagged. Further, the petitioner has sought that the approximately 250-300 cattle, currently housed in the allegedly illegally constructed gaushala (cowshed) within the forest area by the Temple Trust, be safely relocated and rehabilitated to a lawful and appropriate facility. In an earlier petition filed before the NGT, Rana had highlighted the disappearance of ponds and water bodies at the Gwal Pahari and Badshahpur tehsils of Gurgaon.
