Latest news with #Constitution.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Govt aims to collect Rs 4.18 lakh cr from cess, Rs 1.72 lakh cr from surcharge in FY26
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The Centre aims to collect cess of over Rs 4.18 lakh crore in the current fiscal, an 8 per cent growth over the collections as per Revised Estimates (RE) of Union Budget FY25, Parliament was informed on collections from surcharges are expected to increase about 13 per cent to over Rs 1.72 lakh crore in the ongoing 2025-26 fiscal year (April-March).In a written reply to a question in the Rajya Sabha, Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary said cess and surcharges are levied by the central government for the purposes of the Union under Article 271 of the Constitution."The proceeds of such surcharge and cess go toward meeting certain specific needs such as financing of Centrally Sponsored Schemes. The benefits of such expenditure also percolate to states," he per data shared with the House, the Centre has budgeted to collect over Rs 4.18 lakh crore from cess in FY26, higher than about Rs 3.87 lakh crore as per RE of collection is budgeted to rise to over Rs 1.72 lakh crore in FY26, from Rs 1.53 lakh crore collection as per RE in from surcharges and cess do not form part of the divisible pool and are hence not shared with states. Gross tax revenue collected by the Centre forms part of the divisible pool and distributed between the Centre and 8 different cesses are in operation. These are agriculture infrastructure & development cess; cess on crude oil; cess on exports; GST compensation cess; health cess; health and education cess; national calamity contingent duty; and road & infrastructure are levied on corporate tax, income tax , and social welfare surcharge under Customs.
Time of India
6 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Row over SIR: 'Should dead voters, foreigners stay?' CEC pushes back on political pressure
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel New Delhi: Amid political opposition - including in Parliament - to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral roll, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar on Thursday shot back at critics, asking whether the poll panel should get intimidated and allow dead electors, 'fake' voters/foreigners and those registered at multiple places or having migrated out permanently, to stay on the electoral rolls and vote in elections."Isn't a pure voter list being prepared by the ECI through a transparent process the foundation for fair elections and a strong democracy?" he asked, according to the CEC underlined that allowing ineligible people to vote, whether in Bihar or later in the entire country, is against the Constitution."At some point, we all must go beyond ideologies and ponder over these profound questions. Maybe the appropriate time has arrived for India to address this concern," the CEC is said to have CEC's remarks have come as the time limit for submission of enumeration forms closes in Bihar on July 25, setting the stage for publication of the state's draft electoral roll on August also come ahead of the July 28 SC hearing on the ECI's latest assessments show that over one lakh electors in Bihar are 'untraceable' while 21.6 lakh electors have passed away. As many as 31.5 lakh electors are said to have permanently migrated out of their constituencies, while more than seven lakh are yet to submit their forms despite several visits by the Booth Level Officers (BLOs).This means all the above will not figure in the August 1 electoral roll, sparking political concern over 'disenfranchisement' of those unable to submit their however, has underlined that any aggrieved eligible elector, or a recognised party on his behalf, will have time until September 1 to 'claim' inclusion in the final electoral roll if he was somehow left out by the BLO or if his name was wrongly excluded from the draft roll.
Hindustan Times
23-07-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Govt working to form committee to probe allegations against Justice Verma: Sources
The centre is working to form a committee to probe allegations levelled against Justice Yashwant Verma, government sources said on Wednesday. A total of 145 Lok Sabha members signed the impeachment motion against Justice Varma under Articles 124, 217, and 218 of the Constitution.(PTI) Amid the ongoing monsoon session of Parliament, government sources also said that the government was not yet mulling any discussion in Parliament on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise being carried out by the Election Commission in Bihar. This comes after Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said on Sunday that signatures of over 100 MPs have been collected for the impeachment process against Justice Verma, who is currently under scrutiny after burnt cash was discovered at his residence. "The signature (collection) is underway, and it has crossed 100 already," Rijiju said while responding to a question about the status of the requisite signatures of MPs for the impeachment exercise against Justice Verma. When asked about whether the Parliament will take up the issue in this monsoon session scheduled to start on July 21, the Union Minister said, "In the Justice Varma case, the process will be undertaken together by all parties. This is not the move by the government alone. "I can't comment on any business in terms of priority until and unless the matter is passed by the BAC (Business Advisory Committee) with the approval of the chair. It is difficult to make an announcement outside," he added. On Monday, Members of Parliament submitted a memorandum to the Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to remove High Court Justice Yashwant Varma in connection with the cash discovery row. A total of 145 Lok Sabha members signed the impeachment motion against Justice Varma under Articles 124, 217, and 218 of the Constitution. MPs from various parties, including Congress, TDP, JDU, JDS, Jan Sena Party, AGP, SS (Shinde), LJSP, SKP, CPM, etc., signed the memorandum. Notable signatories include MPs Anurag Singh Thakur, Ravi Shankar Prasad, Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, Rajiv Pratap Rudy, PP Chaudhary, Supriya Sule, KC Venugopal, and others. Earlier, the sources had informed about the formation of a committee that is likely to include a judge of the Supreme Court, a chief justice from any of the High Courts and a distinguished jurist. The notices for removal of Justice Varma were given on the first day of the monsoon session of Parliament.
India Today
22-07-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Mamata Banerjee's fitness certificate for bete noire Dhankhar after shock exit
A day after Jagdeep Dhankhar stunned the political circles by resigning, citing health reasons, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Tuesday claimed that the 74-year-old is a healthy man and doing absolutely fine."I don't want to make any comment about this. Let's see what happens. He is a healthy man. I think his health is absolutely okay," Banerjee said of Dhankhar, with whom she had frequent run-ins during his tenure as West Bengal Governor from 2019 to Monday night, Dhankhar, in a surprising move, resigned as the Vice President, citing health concerns. The move came after he chaired the first day of the Monsoon Session in Rajya Sabha, which saw disruptions and subsequent adjournment. Even the harshest of his critics in the Opposition, with whom Dhankhar had frequent run-ins during his tenure and even moved to impeach him, said there was more to it than it met the the BJP amid a row over Dhankhar's resignation, Banerjee said, "First set your own house in order. Douse the fire inside your own house before you try to put it out elsewhere. Sort your own house first and no need to target Bengal."During Dhankhar's nearly three-year tenure as West Bengal Governor, his relationship with Banerjee was notably turbulent and frequently marked by public confrontations and political Dhankhar had actively used his official X handle to comment on state affairs, often criticising the ruling Trinamool Congress government, which led to Banerjee to block him on the platform. Banerjee had accused Dhankhar of overstepping constitutional boundaries and provoking unrest, while the-then Governor claimed he faced verbal attacks from ministers and 'indignities' in his RESIGNS AS VICE PRESIDENTDhankhar, who resigned on Monday, hours after chairing the first day of Monsoon Session in the Rajya Sabha, became the Vice President in August 2022 and was to complete his term in his resignation letter addressed to President Droupadi Murmu, Dhankhar said, "To prioritise health care and abide by medical advice, I hereby resign as the Vice President of India, effective immediately, in accordance with Article 67(a) of the Constitution."Under Article 67 of the Constitution, which deals with the term of office of the Vice President, the Deputy Chairman Harivansh Narayan Singh will manage the day-to-day affairs until a new Vice-President is elected. On the other hand, Article 67(a) says that before the expiry of his term, the Vice-President may resign by submitting his resignation to the President in Murmu on Tuesday accepted Dhankhar's resignation. Following his exit, a vice presidential election is expected to be held soon.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#West Bengal#Mamata Banerjee#Parliament
India Today
20-07-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Justice Varma plea 'irrelevant' amid impeachment motion, say legal experts
Justice Yashwant Varma's petition challenging the findings of the Supreme Court's inquiry committee has been labelled "irrelevant" by legal experts, after Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju revealed that over 100 MPs have already signed a notice to the Speaker in connection with the cash discovery row — the requisite number to move an impeachment motion against a sitting judge in the Lok impending impeachment motion in the Monsoon Session of Parliament is expected to take priority over judicial proceedings, legal experts told India Today TV. Former judges and senior advocates highlighted the procedural precedence of a parliamentary inquiry in such matters."No one can interfere in a parliamentary inquiry," Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave told India Today TV, highlighting the distinct separation of powers mentioned in the Constitution. He further emphasised that "Parliament and court matters operate in different spheres," suggesting that the Supreme Court is unlikely to intervene at this stage. After the Supreme Court's in-house committee recommended Justice Varma's removal following its probe, the focus now shifts to the Lok Sabha, where an impeachment motion for his removal is set to be introduced."When the judge admits that money was found in his house, the rest becomes irrelevant," said a legal expert, indicating that the parliamentary inquiry will centre on these admissions. Despite this, Justice Varma "has the right to be heard by the Parliament Inquiry Committee," which could potentially clear his the impeachment process in Parliament, retired Justice Siddharth Mridul told India Today TV, "If there is an impeachment motion, that motion and the committee that is appointed to conduct an inquiry clearly provide all the steps that need to be followed. The impeachment motion process is to take action against a judge who refuses to resign."Justice Mridul pointed out that the in-house inquiry committee's findings are akin to a preliminary probe report, meant "to satisfy the CJI that there is cause to investigate the judge."Meanwhile, legal experts questioned the reasoning behind Varma's approach to the Supreme Court, with one stating, "I don't see why this petition has come to court. If the judge wants to clear his name, he has to go through the procedure provided by the Constitution."Dave found it "inconceivable for the Supreme Court to interfere in Parliament's inquiry process at such an early stage." Emphasising that there is no connection between an in-house inquiry and a parliamentary inquiry, Dave said, "MPs could have initiated impeachment based on the video that surfaced."Serious questions have been raised regarding police conduct in the case. Observers noted "serious, gross lapses by the police" and asked, "Why was the money allowed to disappear?"advertisement"Corruption is rampant in Judiciary -- nobody wants to publicly discuss it," said Dave, pointing to the need for systemic the impeachment process unfolds, the potential consequences are significant. "If Parliament's committee gives a clean chit, then that will be final," Dave said, highlighting the ultimate authority of Parliament in judicial impeachment matters. The decision now rests with Parliament, said legal experts, with Justice Mridul saying the in-house panel report is now "irrelevant" as only Parliament, and not the courts, can decide the fate of judges.- EndsMust Watch
