Taxation
Seven reasons why TDS provisions are draconian & flawed
If the Modi government wants to offer a fair deal to taxpayers, it will have to reform the draconian practices under TDS 
 
The citizens of this country are punished due to some draconian provisions in the Income Tax (I-T) Act, Rules and notifications. They could even be taken for a ride about the constitutional legality of tax deducted at source (TDS). Harassment because of TDS provisions began under the Congress-led government but nobody has bothered to listen to the woes of lakhs of taxpayers. Here are some thoughts on behalf of tortured taxpayers, for consideration by a government that has promised Achche Din for all of us.
 
1. TDS is not a Direct Tax mechanism: TDS is a regressive provision in the direct tax administration even though it has contributed to higher tax collection. A direct tax is one where the incidence and impact of the tax is on the same person. However, for TDS, incidence is on the payer of the amount to the assessee and the impact is on the assessee. Thus, the very fundamental premise of direct tax faills apart due to this provision. Higher emphasis on TDS underlines lower administrative ability (or utter failure) of the revenue to collect tax using its own mechanism.
 
2. TDS deduction is a biased contract: The payers, who act on behalf of the Tax Department in good faith, to collect the Tax and deposit the same, are put to a lot of hardship - by way of deducting the tax, depositing the tax, monitoring the payment of tax in time, filing of return, ensuring that the return filed is accurately recorded on the Income Tax Department site, downloading of TDS certificates and so on. What is the reward for the deductor for doing all these jobs, which the I-T department is supposed to do? Indeed with the provisions becoming more and more draconian, the deductor is taken to task rather than the assesse. Is it not against the Constitution that you are asked to do something and penalised for it, which in the first place somebody else was supposed to do? 
 
I feel that the Income Tax department should first reward the deductors for complying with TDS provisions. Reward should be a combination of the number of entries and amount deducted. The contract is valid only when there is consideration. Further, in the entire process, the National Securities Depository Ltd (NSDL) and its network makes money. Their value addition is really questionable for the reasons discussed later.
 
3. Draconian Provisions: The interest for delayed payment starts from the date of deduction and not from the due date for payment of tax deducted. Even when the deductor has the intention of paying it on the due date, many a times he may miss the bus due to factors beyond his control. I appeal to the authorities that the interest should only be levied for the delay from the due date. The intention of the legislature may be what is written in the law, but technology has interpreted it another way. Before the advent of technology, the department was asking for interest from the due date. 
 
If this TDS interest provision is not challenged now, tomorrow the department may start collecting interest from the date of capital gains, if the advance tax is delayed.
 
4. Redundant Provisions: There are many judgements which specify, the deductor will not be considered an assessee in default, in case the deductee has declared such income on which the TDS was to be deducted. Going by the intention of the legislature, the TDS should be considered as a mechanism to collect the tax. And, if the tax has been paid by the assessee, then the person who was responsible for deducting should not be penalised. However, the penal provisions of Rs 100/- penalty per day and the prosecution drive initiated by the department to attract compounding, are being utilised as methods of extortion. This should be stopped and most of the penalty and prosecution proceedings would become redundant if a careful analysis is done as to whether the deductee has paid his taxes or not.
 
5. Technology and limits of technology: There are many cases of mismatch of TDS. This puts the genuine assesses to great hardship. This only highlights the fact that the NSDL / I-T department has failed miserably, in effectively implementing technology. Technology cannot make mistakes - it is the logic with which the technology is put to use which is ridden with problems. This is precisely the reason for many of the catastrophes in tax cases, especially of individual assessees.
 
6. Simple technology is the best technology: We have witnessed a smooth transition of payment of taxes from the manual method to the electronic method. Even for TDS we could have had a similar system. There was no need for NSDL to come into the picture at all, except to make money at our expense. We could have had a deductor simply paying the challan 280 or a similar one with additional information of the deductee. This would ensure that the 26AS of the deductor and deductee would show the TDS paid/TDS credit received. Who ensured that NSDL gets into this business and why?
 
7. Lop-sided use technology: TDS return mechanism is a deductor-centric mechanism. Gullible deductees are left with no technology tools to recover the TDS deducted or even to get tax credit. The plight of the deductees is miserable, where unscrupulous deductors have not paid /filed the return etc. I urge the Government, that the deductee should have an option/right to update the details of the transactions where their TDS has been deducted, and this should be uploaded with the PAN and TAN of the deductor. This will help the Assessing Officer recover the TDS and help the deductees get their due tax credit.
 
It is not difficult for this government to fix these issues. But for this, it has to listen to impartial voices and be bold. Will it? 
 
(Ananthram Rao is a partner at Borkar & Shenoy, Chartered Accountants)

User

COMMENTS

Mahesh kumar Aneja

3 years ago

The article has exactly pointed out TDS provisions being the anti businessmen . As this affects millions of tax payers Modi govt can do very well to eliminate or atleast simplify the entire procedure where billions of manhours of professionals are wasted and still subjected to dranconion penalities
This one simple step can aid in making a beginning in creating environment of easy business
doing
CA Mahesh Kumar Aneja

DEEPAK DANG

3 years ago

On line filing of return of I. Tax has become difficult for aged ones especially 45+. Moreover, it was observed that younger ones have no time to understand the system. Resultantly, it has become a gold mine for people who are able to file return, without taking into account all the facts. They go to the offices & file returns in bulk without any accountability. Lateron, few frauds may come to our notce. So the Govt. should take it seriously & exempt to file return upto the taxable income of Rs.500000/-. If there is no other income except the income, subject to TDS, or tax rebate not allowed at source like 80 G, with the taxable income of Rs.1000000/-, e-filing may be an option.

Usha Pillai

3 years ago

There are instances where hapless deductees have been penalised simply because a deductor has wrongly credited the TDS of some other party to the PAN number of this hapless deductee. Consequently, the IT dept comes down on this deductee and alleges concealment of income. At the same time they pursue the real culprit for shortfall in tax payment. Getting all parties to rectify such errors takes an eternity. This regularly happens with Post office deposits and bank FDs.

Harwant

3 years ago

I also believe that a PIL should be filed. Is there is anybody with a legal background who is willing to take the lead? We should all pool our intellectual and financial resources to do so. Any body willing to take the lead?

Durgesh J

3 years ago

Excellent Presentation Anant ! The legality of TDS must be challenged by filing PIL based on these grounds.

Also, why is IT Department not paying to the deductees getting TDS refunds, interest with effect from the date of deduction ?

Simple Indian

3 years ago

Also, no TDS should be applicable on interests earned on Bank deposits. If the total income of the person is within permissible limits (now Rs. 2.5 lakhs) including interest income, no TDS would be applicable.

Harwant

3 years ago

1. It may be justifiable to deduct tax at source by an employer based on the likely tax liability but it should also be mandatory to issue Certificate of Tax deducted at source at least one month prior to the last date of filing return which is usually July 31, 2014. The employers who fail to issue such certificates must be penalized.

2. However the mandatory 30% tax deduction at source even on an fixed deposit interest income of say Rs. 9,000 for a depositor having no taxable income, if the depositor does not have a pan card is definitely draconian.

3. Also it is a legalized robbery to levy any kind of income tax or deduction at source on fixed deposits with banks when the interest rate is less than the inflation rate. It becomes a tax on SAVINGS and is very harsh to fixed income senior citizens or retirees.

4. The entire tax regime is biased and anti tax payer. It assumes that all citizens are tax dodgers!

5. The entire TDS provisions need to be reviewed and preferably abolished as far individual assesses are concerned.

6. I am shocked that no body has cared to comment on my first post regarding TDS on purchase or sale of property by individuals and the totally unfair provisions of deducting tax on transaction value rather than on income accrued to the seller. Why should an individual buyer of a home or property be held responsible for tax payments of the seller whether individual or a builder? IT department has special expertise for harassing individual tax payers.

REPLY

Ananthram Rao

In Reply to Harwant 3 years ago

Regarding the 6th point, I would like comment as follows:
1. TDS system itslef is questionable for the reasons discussed here in this forum.
2. The apprehension of the department is that a lot of capital gains(CG) arising out of property transactions get out of the taxatio n channel. Earlier, there was a provision that in property sale transactions, the seller had to obtain ITCC (a clearance certificate from AO saying that there is no CG or the seller had made provision to pay the tax. It was a good provision, but was causing delays in the process. After this provision was deleted, there was a scope for tax evasion. So this section has come in to plug the loophole. This is quite arbitrary mechanism as many and buyers, as payers in other TDS cases, are put to lot of hardship.

narayanakr

3 years ago

Though the article is timely, it has some factual errors and impracticable suggestions:

1. TDS is infact tax incidence on the payee, since certain sum is withheld from the payments made to him. it is wrong to say that TDS has tax incidence on payer.

2. plea for some sort of reward for deductors is timely

3. it is wrong to say that in manual system 201(1A) interest was charged from due date. the law is same then and now
4. from 1-7-2012, the deductor cannot be held as assessee in default for non-dedution if payee has discharged tax liabilitity. proviso to 201(1) ensures that. it is too much to expect govt to allow defaultin deductors to go scot free even without penalty/prosecution.
5. TDS mis match is caused due to uploading of defective data by deductors. it is wrong to blame the NSDL or ITD for that. in fact the department has put in place some relief mechanism in TDS mismatch cases, to redress grievance of tax payers.
6. The department has put in place protected system of allowing TDS credit based on the info uploaded by the deductors. the hitches needs to be removed. it is wrong to blame entire mechanism. without TDS data in e-mode it is impossible to have e-filing and e- processing of returns which has benefitted crores of tax payers since CPC bangalore was set up.
7. good suggestion. it wish to add that govt should give enforcing officers powers of arresting TDS defaulters who have failed to remit TDS after deducting it. presently may such defaults are roaming free after eating away crores of rupees of govt, while hapless payees are struggling to get credit for the tds deducted from them.

REPLY

Ananthram Rao

In Reply to narayanakr 3 years ago

Pointwise comments:
1. In indirect tax, the incidence and impact differs. In case of TDS, the impact is on the payee. The incidence is on the payer.
3. In the days of manual assessment, we never heard of interest being charged from the date of deduction. Delay was always calculated from the due date.
4, 201(1A) is a half hearted relief as there is still liability of interest payable from the date on which sum was deductible to the date on which payee files the return.( Q. Who will keep tab whether the payee files the returns? Who will ask when he filed the return? Who will bell the cat?)
Further, to qualify as "not an assessee in default" there are 3 conditions attached as per the proviso to section 201, and yet another condition a certificate from the accountant has to be furnished?
Further, inspite of all these, AO may still can initiate penalty proceeding!as per second proviso to section 201.
5.6. Yes, many of the mistakes are attributable to deductors. My question is the Nsdl filing utility has validation facility. Why the errors should be reported even after the validation test is passed. Why validation process be made complete and exhaustive. Further, the data integrity is not ensured by NSDL, due to which the many a times AO says their system is not reflecting the TDS which appears in 26AS!
Thank you for your valuable contribution to the discussion!

vnrao

3 years ago

He is not correct across the globe many countries have this practice.

vnrao

3 years ago

he is not correct across globe this practice is there when mojarity of assesses enjoy keeping black money especially high net individuals this should be futher strengted he playing to the gallary tax dept should not waste time in tax collection which is due to it the black money in the counrty is more than slashed abroad

Ananthram Rao

3 years ago

I do not think TDS return filing or TDS assessment are the kind of the jobs a CA should be handling. He really add value in actual business process and advisory related works.

REPLY

Jadhwani

In Reply to Ananthram Rao 3 years ago

I do not think TDS return filing or TDS assessment are the kind of the jobs a CA should be handling. He really add value in actual business process and advisory related works. SURE BUT WHO PAYS THE COSTS ................ CERTAINLY A NORMAL PERSON WILL FIND THIS AS LOSS OF MONEY FOR HIM

Harwant

3 years ago

MISUSE OF TDS BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

My past employer (An educational institution under MHRD, Government of India) has not provided till now the form 16 for tax deduction at source even after repeated reminders!

Can anybody let me know the remedy?

REPLY

Ananthram Rao

In Reply to Harwant 3 years ago

1. You can check 26AS and check for the credit.
2. Write to the TDS officer / AO.

Nalin Patel

3 years ago

government invents even more sophisticated ways to collect taxes in advance, pay tax now and earn later, see section 115JC and 115JD, i had sold my only land , i had to pay AMT under 115JC at 18.5% i do not have any other land, now i have to claim AMT credit of excess tax paid under 115JD for next 10 years, i do not have taxable income, also i do not have any other land , how am i able to claim credit for AMT-Credit in next 10 years, other wise the tax credit is forefeited, this means i pay tax now , buy property then after , sell it later, earn some profit and claim credit for the excess payment, !!!!, government is an entity which rules you with your money only and is not accountable to you at all.

Avinash Murkute

3 years ago

Utterly biased article. It is not at all balanced article for which MONEYLIFE is respected. I give following reasons.

1) Three party Contract is perfect contract.
2) Let us talk some dirty tricks
a) Entity claims that Tax has been deducted and never pays to ITD. Now the assesse will have to run from pillar to post to file complaint and then what happens under the carpet again he will have to take pen and paper. ITD doesn't work like a fire or police department and they come to the complainant. I am still not talking about the reward to complainant.
b) Entity claims that tax has been deducted but never issues Form 16/16A and claims to go to 26AS.
c) Entity deducts tax in one name, deposits in other name, issues Form 16A certificate in third name
d) Entity claims to have deducted taz and say they will issue certificate in the July and when July is over they Augustly say that tax was never deducted and pocket the money.
e) 26AS and Form 16 A mismatch
f) 24AS Form 16 Matched but CPC gets International certification by claiming 2+2=8


a/b/c/d/e/f and many more are reality of tax domain.

3) The leased author have not given any reward to honest taxpayers and have shown inclination towards middlemen.

These are my honest observations and if ITD wants any information, I can prove that 2 plus 2 is four and not 8 apart from above malpractices in taxation with the help of so called brilliant fellows of ICAI under OATH.



REPLY

Avinash Murkute

In Reply to Avinash Murkute 3 years ago

Please read as LEARNED AUTHOR in place of leased author. Regret.

Harwant

3 years ago

Yes, you are right Peter-It is an untenable tyranny imposed by the Tax Department.

The only beneficiaries of the draconian tax regime in India may be the the Income Tax officials and the CA's.

One of my friends was to deposit TDS of Rs. 3,000. He paid this to his CA along with his fee of Rs. 5000. The assistant of the CA forgot to pay within the specified number of days and my friend had to pay a penalty of Rs 10,000.

So it cost the tax depositor Rs. 18,000 to deposit the TDS of Rs. 3,000.

What a shame on the Tax Regime and the Babus who run the Finance Ministry.

TDS must be abolished without any further delay.

TDS is a total waste of resources and unconstitutional.

REPLY

Jadhwani

In Reply to Harwant 3 years ago

perfect ....................

Jadhwani

In Reply to Harwant 3 years ago

perfect ....................

Budget 2014 & Your Money
How will the budget 2014 impact your personal finances?

 

Tax Slabs Increased

The Budget brought some respite to savers in a high inflation environment. For senior citizens (above 60 years but below 80 years), the threshold limit increased from Rs2.50 lakh to Rs3 lakh. For others, threshold limit increased from Rs2 lakh to Rs2.50 lakh. For individuals above 80 years, there is no change; Rs5 lakh threshold continues. An individual will save a minimum of Rs5,150/- in taxes (Rs50,000*10.3%). An individual in the highest income slab will save Rs5,665 [Rs50,000*11.33% (including surcharge)]. 
 
Section 80C Limit Hiked
Taxpayers can now save more on tax, with a higher limit under Section 80C. The limit of investment under Section 80C has been increased to Rs1.5 lakh from the earlier Rs1 lakh. With this increase, an individual would save a minimum of Rs5,150 (Rs50,000*10.3%) and a maximum of Rs16,995(Rs50,000*33.99%).
 

Home Loan Interest

To encourage people, especially the young, to own houses, the tax exemption for interest paid on self-occupied house under a home loan has been increased to Rs2 lakh from Rs1.5 lakh earlier. The tax-savings for individuals would range between Rs5,150 and Rs16,995, depending on the income-tax bracket of the individual.
 
Additionally, on 15 July 2014, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) announced a raft of measures to encourage bank lending. Therefore, home loans up to Rs50 lakh may get cheaper. Home loans to individuals up to Rs50 lakh (for houses of value up to Rs65 lakh) in metros and loans up to Rs40 lakh (home value Rs50 lakh) in other centres will be considered as affordable housing. Extending these loans will entitle banks to float infrastructure bonds which will not be subject to statutory reserve requirements.
 

Residential Property

The Finance Bill 2014 also made changes to the capital gains for the sale proceeds of a residential property re-invested. According to the new provision, you cannot sell one house and invest the money in two smaller houses to claim tax exemption from long-term capital gains. The Bill states that the benefit of long-term capital gains tax exemption can be availed only for re-investment in one residential house and that too has to be purchased in the country. However, the controversy about whether two adjoining flats constitute one residential house or not continues.
 
Under Section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, an individual can get long-term capital gains tax exemption after selling his house property, which is held for more than three years, and purchase another residential house or construct a house within three years of the sale.
 

Tax Saving Bonds

Presently, the Income-tax Act provides a deduction from long-term capital gains if the amount of gains from selling capital assets is invested in certain bonds issued by the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) and the Rural Electrification Corporation (REC) within six months from the day of the sale. The investment of capital gains in bonds for this Section 54EC exemption is now being restricted to Rs50 lakh both in the year of transfer of the capital asset and in the subsequent year, so that one can’t claim exemption of Rs1 crore for investments made in both the years. However, there is no mention about exemption for gain earned in the next year. For example, if you have claimed the full Rs50 lakh benefit in the previous year and sell another asset, whether this would come under the Rs50 lakh limit of the previous financial year or the current financial year, is not clear.
 

Debt Mutual Funds

In the Finance Bill, the concessional rate of 10% on long-term capital gains (LTCG) on sale of non-equity units has been withdrawn and the period of ‘long-term’ has been raised to 36 months from 12 months. With this, the tax for LTCG of debt mutual fund units will be at a single rate of 20% with indexation. However, a clarification on the applicability of this new amendment is yet to be announced. This will immediately impact fixed maturity plans (FMPs). Those who have invested in debt funds maturing in the next three years will be impacted. 
 
The Finance Bill has also changed the calculation of dividend distribution tax (DDT). Dividends distributed by mutual funds will now be paid on a gross basis and not on the net amount of dividend paid. Therefore, the effective rate of DDT will now be as much as 39.52% compared to 28.33% earlier.
 

Life Insurance

It has been wrongly assumed that all insurance policies are exempt from tax under Section 10 (10D). This Section only exempts amounts where the sum assured is less than 10 times the annual premium. Therefore, life insurance policy maturity, or surrender proceeds where Section 10 (10D) does not apply, will be subject to a TDS of 2% at the time of payment. If the amount received is less than Rs1 lakh, it will be exempt.
 

Save More in PPF

The investment limit in public provident fund (PPF) has been increased to Rs1.5 lakh from the earlier Rs1 lakh. PPF enjoys the exempt-exempt-exempt status; therefore, the contribution, the accumulation and withdrawal are all exempt from tax. This makes it a popular investment product. For the current financial year, the interest paid on investments continues to be 8.7%.
 
The finance minister has widened the list of investment products. The Kisan Vikas Patra (KVP), which was junked in December 2011, has been brought back. KVPs were available in denominations of Rs100 to Rs50,000. The details of the new scheme are awaited. A special small saving scheme focusing on education and marriage of the girl child has also been introduced. The National Savings Certificate (NSC) will also offer an insurance cover, providing additional benefit for the saver.
 

Single Demat and Uniform KYC

As a result of the steps taken to energise the financial market and encourage savings, investors may be able to access details of their investments across a wide range of instruments, not just shares and mutual funds, from a single demat account. There would also be one know-your-customer (KYC) requirement which can be used across the entire financial sector. These changes will enable consumers to access and transact all financial assets through one account. This has been on the planning board for a long time; implementation will be the key.
 

Single EPF Account

The single employee provident fund (EPF) account will enable over 50 million EPF members to obviate the process of transferring their accounts on changing jobs. At present, employees have to apply for transfer of PF accounts when they change jobs. This will benefit approximately 1.3 million PF transfer claims every year. 

User

How the FM has created confusion about retirement products

The Union Budget 2014-15 has talked about retirement saving products and in the process created confusions

 

The maiden budget of Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government mentions on page 12 that that there would be a “uniform tax treatment for pension and mutual fund linked retirement plans”. However, neither the actual budget speech of Arun Jaitley, the finance minister nor the Finance Bill 2014 makes any mention of it. Similarly, there is confusion on the applicability of tax benefits for private sector employees who have invested in New Pension System (NPS) schemes.

 

When it comes to retirement saving options, few look beyond the options such as the Public Provident Fund (PPF) and the Employee Provident Fund (EPF). However, investing in these products alone may not be adequate for savers. Those who are active in their financial planning for retirement or those who are coaxed by agents or distributors often consider retirement or pension plans of mutual funds or insurance products or equity linked savings schemes (ELSSs). Some may even invest in the schemes of the NPS. For them, the FM has created a lot of confusion.

 

While there is a mention of ‘Uniform tax treatment for pension fund and mutual fund linked retirement plans’, no one is clear about what he really meant. Put it down to shoddy work by the officials in the finance ministry, who as usual have no truck with the savers and their issues.

 

There are just two such retirement-oriented schemes from mutual funds right now: Templeton India Pension Plan and UTI Retirement Benefit Pension Fund. Both these schemes offer investors a tax benefit (up to Rs1.5 lakh, raised from Rs1 lakh earlier) as notified under section 80C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Would such the tax benefits be extended to NPS?

 

At present, there is a total limit of Rs1.5 lakh (raised from Rs1 lakh earlier) up to which you can claim deduction under Section 80CCD (1) (for your own contribution towards NPS account) that is included in your 80C limit. Deduction under 80CCD (1) will be allowed only if you invest in Tier-1 NPS which puts severe restrictions. If your employer is contributing on your behalf, under Section 80CCD (2), you can avail of an additional tax benefit for your employers contribution. This is over and above the Rs1.5 lakh limit (raised from Rs1 lakh earlier) of Section 80C.

 

Under Section 80CCD (2) if an employer contributes 10% of the basic salary plus dearness allowance to the NPS account of an employee, it gives excellent tax benefit to the employee. The best part is that such contributions are not included in the exemption limit that you can avail under Section 80C and the employer can show his contribution as deduction from the business income under Section 36 I (IV) A. Therefore, can employers opt for retirement plans of mutual funds for employee retirement contributions and gain the same benefit as that of the NPS? No one knows.

 

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) at its board meeting in February 2014 discussed the need for restructuring of tax incentives for mutual funds schemes. One of the proposals was to introduce Mutual Fund Linked Retirement Plans (MFLRP), a pension fund similar to the currently available NPS, EPF and PPF. “MFLRP is envisaged to give them (EPF, PPF and NPS investors) a good alternative for parking their retirement savings,” mentions a SEBI paper on ‘Long Term Policy for Mutual Funds in India’. Yet, even after the budget proposal, SEBI and mutual funds remain mum on the introduction of these schemes.

 

Commenting on the budget proposal, A Balasubramanian, chief executive of Birla Sun Life Mutual Fund says, “This has opened up the retirement investment space for mutual funds. It can become a 401(k) (of India).”

 

However, fund companies are still waiting for additional details on how this scheme would work. There is a no clear framework on how the plan would work. Would it be according to that outlined by SEBI in its board meeting this year? Or would it be something different altogether? Nobody even knows the FM is at all considering MFLRPs.

 

NPS tax benefits for private sector employees

 

The applicability of Section 80 CCD for private sector employees investing in a pension fund has been a much-discussed issue. Private sector firms were allowed to enrol employees into the scheme from 1 May 2009. However, a condition of joining service on or after 1 Jan 2004 for claiming deduction under section 80CCD was intended only for public sector employees. The latest budget has amended the wordings of the condition so that even private sector employees who have joined service before 1 Jan 2004 can claim deduction for NPS contributions under section 80CCD.

 

How would this impact private sector employees who’ employers contribute on their behalf to the NPS scheme? Industry experts have different views. Some are saying the section was reworded to bring clarity and thus would have no implication for private sector employees who have claimed deduction under this section earlier. Others have the view that, private sector employees, employed before 1 January 2004 would have wrongly claimed a tax deduction, according to the exact wordings, they would not be eligible for a tax deduction under this section. The contributions made by them would be construed as wrong deduction of tax. Only an official statement would clear this confusion.

User

COMMENTS

R Balakrishnan

3 years ago

Alas,this budget exposes the utter ignorance of Jet Lee and the RSS chappies in understanding of finance, esp of the variety that makes for the national budget. They have made a total mess of things and once again we hope that a general economic revival will take care of things in general.

REPLY

MG Warrier

In Reply to R Balakrishnan 3 years ago

My view is that we should not take undue advantage of the fact that comments are not being 'moderated' by moneylife. This is a personal view. We should use this space for specific comments on subject/s covered in the article rather than to express our views on politics and economics in general. The positive note, 'a general economic revival will take care of things in general', is to be welcomed.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)