<ul><li><keyword id="375780" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="DDT">DDT</keyword> is the tax payable by companies which give dividends to its shareholders. The existing taxation laws in India do not levy taxes to the investors on the income made through dividends. </li><li><keyword id="7836802" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="Budget-2020">Budget 2020</keyword> abolishes DDT and passes on the tax burden to the investors by treating the income through dividends on par with other regular income. </li><li>What has changed now with DDT and how it impacts taxpayers – here we discuss in this article.</li></ul>Dividend refers to the returns a company gives to its shareholders on the profits it earned in a given fiscal year. Income Tax laws in India had earlier exempted the investors from having to pay taxes on the income they made from dividends received from Indian companies. On the other hand, the companies had to pay <keyword id="181115" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="dividend-distribution-tax">Dividend Distribution Tax</keyword> (DDT). This kind of taxation procedure is akin to TDS (Tax Deduction at Source) operating in many other taxing formats. Budget 2020 has brought in a change in how incomes through dividends will be taxed henceforth in India. Who had to pay DDT and what was the rate of DDT? All the provisions related to DDT are mentioned in Section 1150. Before Budget 2020, a company in India declaring dividend needs to pay DDT at the rate of 15% on the gross value of the dividends payable to the investors. The calculations would work out as 17.65% taxes on the total amount of the dividend. If the surcharges and cess are added, the resulting rate of dividend would be 20.56%. Only when the income through dividends received by individuals and Hindu Undivided family or partnership and private trusts exceeded ₹10 lakhs, it would invite 10% tax. What concerns were raised on DDT Market participants like brokers have been pressing for so long to scrap the DDT. Industry experts find DDT adding up to the burden of the corporate and they argued that it made the markets less attractive. In addition to the DDT, the other tax burdens the other taxes levied on market instruments include the Securities Transaction Tax (STT) and Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG). Earlier in the Union Budget 2018, the former Finance Minister Arun Jaitley had introduced DDT on the equities of mutual funds. What has changed with DDT in the Union Budget 2020 Budget 2020 has abolished Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) and the FM Nirmala Sitharaman stated that income through dividends, shares and mutual funds will henceforth be treated on par with the regular income and the taxes will be applied on such category of incomes on par with the tax slab rates applicable in the said individual’s case. The latest budget says that all types of dividend incomes will hereafter be fully taxable. This move will increase the burden of taxable income of individuals. While this can mean a higher tax burden on the small and medium scale investors not making more than ₹10 lakhs in earnings through dividends, corporates might choose to increase dividends. Without tax, companies would have surplus funds to distribute to their shareholders.

What Is dividend distribution tax and what has changed with DDT in budget 2020

<ul><li><keyword id="43945" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chhattisgarh">Chhattisgarh</keyword> has become the latest state to exit the central government’s <keyword id="6199405" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="ayushman-bharat">Ayushman Bharat</keyword> <keyword id="35450" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="insurance">insurance</keyword> scheme. </li><li>In addition to <keyword id="6357783" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="West-bengal">West Bengal</keyword> and Chhattisgarh, the non-BJP ruled states of Odisha, Telangana as well as Delhi have also rejected the scheme. </li><li>All of these states either have plans to or have already started their own health insurance coverage schemes.</li></ul>The central Indian state of Chhattisgarh has become the latest state to exit the central government’s Ayushman Bharat insurance scheme. The state’s health minister, T S Singhdeo, said that the government would instead offer its <a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/india/chhattisgarh-to-move-towards-universal-healthcare-plan-t-s-singhdeo-5543794/">own universal healthcare scheme</a> featuring free medicines, outpatient care, and improved public health infrastructure via an existing network. In addition to West Bengal and Chhattisgarh, the non-BJP ruled states of Odisha, Telangana as well as Delhi have also rejected the scheme. All of these states either have plans to or have already started their own health insurance coverage schemes. Delhi, in particular, took a similar line as West Bengal in that it objected to how the scheme was being branded as mainly a central government programme. The common thread across these states rejecting the programme is that they are ruled by the rivals of <keyword id="6354642" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Modi">Modi</keyword>’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). However, that is not the only challenge. The national health insurance scheme was rolled out at the end of September last year, with the stipulated aim of covering 110 million families to the tune of half a million rupees a year. Around <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/ayushman-bharat-a-game-changer-6-85-lakh-patients-treated-in-100-days-jaitley/articleshow/67335634.cms">685,000</a> patients had reportedly availed of the scheme by the end of 2018, according to Finance Minister Arun Jaitley. As the minister from Chhattisgarh explained, Ayushman Bharat provided insurance for secondary and tertiary <keyword id="6354525" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="healthcare">healthcare</keyword> in hospitals, whereas <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/healthcare/chhattisgarh-govt-to-pull-out-of-ayushman-bharat/articleshow/67550227.cms">nearly 80%</a> of the state’s citizens required primary healthcare services. Outpatient treatment, which is hugely popular with India’s poor households according to <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/201612_health-and-morbidity.pdf">a Brookings report</a>, isn’t provided under the scheme. In addition, as public hospitals lack the requisite infrastructure, the government is relying heavily on private hospitals, which aren’t that widespread in semi-urban and rural areas and can promote expensive treatments to improve their margins. The programme is not well funded either. The central government will have to increase its annual funding for the scheme as its ₹20 billion allocation in the 2018 Budget is insufficient - <a href="https://www.livemint.com/Politics/kYhU6jUzQHcz4gexCpVUQP/Confident-of-getting-more-funds-for-Ayushman-Bharat-CEO-Ind.html">a view echoed </a>by the CEO of the programme, Indu Bhushan. As of end-December 2018, the central government had already authorised <a href="https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/money-and-banking/centre-has-spent-850-crore-on-ayushman-bharat-till-date/article25836102.ece">₹8.5 billion </a>worth of claims. A higher allocation will likely be unveiled in the government's interim budget on February 1st. Whose insurance is it anyway The state of West Bengal, which merged its own health protection programme Swastyasathi with Ayushman Bharat last year, also pulled out of the scheme. Chief minister Mamata Banerjee rationalised the move by citing the central government’s attempts<a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/india/mamata-banerjee-pulls-out-of-pmjay-ayushman-bharat-scheme-says-centre-taking-credit-5532864/"> to take full credit</a> for what was essentially a joint effort, wherein the state government shared 40% of the cost. While the states’ pull-out will affect the momentum and portability of the national programme, it also indicates the problems associated with its implementation. Granted, it's only been a little over 100 days since the scheme came into operation, but the gaps in the plan are already evident. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/indias-insurers-are-being-left-out-of-the-countrys-national-health-insurance-scheme/articleshow/65422864.cms">India’s insurers are being left out of the country’s national health insurance scheme</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/r-india-allocates-15-billion-for-modicare-health-insurance-2018-3">India allocates $1.5 billion for 'Modicare' health insurance</a>

India's 'Modicare' insurance scheme needs some fixing

Here are India’s cabinet ministers who were appointed in 2014

<keyword id="1575" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Congress">Congress</keyword> leader <keyword id="5268" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Rahul-Gandhi">Rahul Gandhi</keyword> announced a “first-of-its-kind’ basic income scheme for India’s poorest households. If voted into power come election time in April and May 2019, Gandhi said that the Congress would give ₹6,000/month to the 20% poorest households in India - which roughly equates to 250 million individual beneficiaries or 50 million households. The <keyword id="14666" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="BJP">BJP</keyword> had also unveiled a minimum income support scheme for farmers in its interim Budget on February 1st, 2019. Under the scheme, titled Kisan Yojana, cash will be transferred to beneficiaries, which hold 2 hectares of land or less, in three installments of ₹2000 a year, culminating in a total payment of ₹6000 per year. Here are how the rivals’ income guarantee schemes stack up. TABLE A: <table style="border-width: initial; border-style: none;"></colgroup></colgroup><tbody><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Income support </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">BJP </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Congress </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Guarantee </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">₹6000/year </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">₹72000/year </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Target Population </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">120 million people </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">250 million people </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Beneficiaries </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Small farmers </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Poorest households </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Annual Cost to the exchequer </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">₹750 billion </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">₹3.6 trillion </td></tr></tbody></table> At this stage, it seems that the Congress’s scheme is covering more of India’s voters - more than two times as much. However, since the start of the year, the BJP has unveiled a number of additional sops for the electorate. In addition to the farmer handouts, the BJP outlined a pension scheme for informal sector workers in its interim budget. The scheme proposes a monthly pension of ₹3,000 above the age of 60. TABLE B: <table style="border-width: initial; border-style: none;"></colgroup></colgroup><tbody><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Pension Scheme </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">BJP </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Congress </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Income Guarantee </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">₹36,000/year </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;"> </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Target Population </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">100 million people </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;"> </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Beneficiaries </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Workers above the age of 60. The scheme will eventually cover all workers in the informal sector that earn less than ₹15,000 a month. </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;"> </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Annual Cost to Exchequer </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">₹5 billion </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;"> </td></tr></tbody></table> The government has earmarked an allocation of ₹5 billion for the scheme. However, the cost is relatively small because it is counting on informal workers between the ages of 29 and 60 to make a contribution of ₹100 a month. With the scheme, the total amount of people covered by the BJP’s election sops now increases to 220 million people. The ruling administration is also offering tax breaks for workers in the formal sector that earn less than ₹500,000 a year. TABLE C: <table style="border-width: initial; border-style: none;"></colgroup></colgroup><tbody><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Tax Breaks </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">BJP </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Congress </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Income Guarantee </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Full tax rebate </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;"> </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Target Population </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">30 million people </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;"> </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Beneficiaries </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Individual taxpayers with annual income of ₹500,000 or less </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;"> </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">Annual Cost to Exchequer </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;">₹185 billion worth of tax revenue </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-right:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 0.75pt;border-top:solid #000000 0.75pt;vertical-align:bottom;padding:2pt 2pt 2pt 2pt;"> </td></tr></tbody></table> <table style="border-width: initial; border-style: none;"></colgroup></colgroup><tbody></tbody></table>The scheme, which is targeted at individual middle-class taxpayers, is expected to provide a cumulative tax benefit of ₹185 billion to around 30 million Indians, bringing the total amount of people covered on par with the Congress at 250 million. Lastly, the BJP has one more scheme to convincingly tip the scales in its favour. In early January 2019, Modi’s Cabinet approved <a href="https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/ten-per-cent-reservation-economically-weaker-upper-caste-modi-government-1425241-2019-01-07">a 10% reservation </a>for “economically backward upper castes” in government jobs and educational institutions. To qualify as economically backward, a beneficiary has to earn ₹800,000 or less a year or own 5 hectares of land or less or have a house that is smaller than 1000 sq ft. Hence, there is a significant degree of overlap with the aforementioned schemes. The BJP has thus, has offered handouts to various swathes of India’s voters - working and not working; poor and the not-so-poor. While it remains to be seen what else the Congress government will come up with as election campaigning intensifies, the minimum income guarantee scheme is positioned as the big election announcement. Finance Minister Arun Jaitley has questioned the viability of the scheme, and explained that the current government was offering <a href="https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/arun-jaitley-says-congress-minimum-income-guarantee-a-political-transaction-of-poverty-2012639">a higher annual payment</a> to India’s poorest families under its existing schemes. Unfortunately, these election sops often fail to address the lack of jobs in the economy. They implicitly highlight the relative ease in positioning “free cash” as a solution to voters’ financial troubles as opposed to job creation. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/explainer-the-modi-governments-pension-scheme-for-informal-workers/articleshow/67790926.cms">Explained: The Modi government’s pension scheme for informal workers</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/income-tax-slabs-for-2019-20/articleshow/67788923.cms">No tax proposed on annual income up to ₹500,000</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/as-expected-the-modi-administration-just-launched-a-direct-benefit-transfer-scheme-for-the-nations-farmers/articleshow/67786710.cms">India's farmers will get ₹6000 a year from the Modi government</a>

Here’s a comparison of the election sops offered by the BJP and the Congress

Arun Jaitley, the finance minister, said nine pillars were needed to transform India. During his Budget 2016 speech, Jaitley said rural and key social areas needed special impetus for India’s growth story. 
 
Here are 15 key reforms that Jaitley mentioned in his budget to turn his vision into a reality. 
 
1. The government is firm on its course towards fiscal consolidation without compromising on its development agenda. 3.5% fiscal deficit is targeted for FY 2017. 
 
2. Total allocation for Agriculture, Farmers’ welfare and Irrigation set at Rs. 47,912 cr, which is nearly twice the allocation of the previous year. 
 
3. New Health Protection scheme will provide health cover up to Rs. 1 lakh per family and additional Rs. 30,000 for senior citizens. 
 
4. Free LPG connections will be provided in the name of woman member of a family to 1.5 cr BPL households in 2016-17 and to continue for two more years to cover 5 cr households in total. 
 
5. Massive increase in public spending on infrastructure to Rs. 2.21 lakh cr, an increase of 22.5% over the previous year. 
 
6. Higher Education Financing Authority set up, with an initial capital base of Rs. 1,000 cr to promote higher education. In addition, 10 public and 10 private institutions to emerge as world-class Teaching and Research Institutions. 
 
7. Promoting a tax-friendly regime and minimizing hassles due to litigation through a New Dispute Resolution Scheme with low or zero penalties. Ongoing tax cases can be settled with ease. 
 
8. Increased relief for middle-class tax-payers by raising the ceiling of tax rebate under Section 87A to Rs. 5,000 for individuals with income less than Rs. 5 lakhs and by raising the limit of deduction of rent paid under section 80GG to Rs. 60,000. 
 
9. Directly providing financial and other subsidies benefits to people who deserve them by enacting a new law and developing a social security platform using Aadhar. 
 
10. Boosting formal sector employment by provisioning Rs. 1,000 cr towards contributing 8.33% on behalf of all new employees enrolling in EPFO for the first three years of their employment. 
 
11. Simplified and pro-market tax measures such as laying out the roadmap of phasing out of exemptions under Corporate Taxes, abolishing small cesses, providing complete pass through of income-tax to securitization trusts and reducing period of obtaining long-term capital gains treatment for unlisted companies to three years. 
 
12. Promoting entrepreneurship by increasing the turnover limit under Presumptive taxation scheme to Rs. 2 cr, targeting to disburse loans worth Rs. 1.8 lakh cr under PM Mudra Yojana and providing 100% deduction of profits for 3 out of 5 years for start-ups. 
 
13. Facilitating Affordable Housing by 100% tax exemption for profits from small projects, not subjecting distribution REITs and INVITs to Dividend Distribution Tax and encouraging small first-time home buyers by deducting ¬additional interest of Rs. 50,000. 
 
14. Reducing black money through a scheme to declare undisclosed income by paying 45% tax in a given compliance window. 
 
15. Strengthening the financial sector by allocating Rs. 25,000 cr towards recapitalising Public Sector Banks (PSBs), listing Government-owned General Insurance companies, and spelling out a roadmap for consolidating PSBs.

Here are 15 key reforms announced by FM to transform India

<ul><li>The body plans to use population data from the 2011 Census to allocate funds to states. So the higher a state’s population, the more funding it gets.</li><li>This reverses a decades-long practice of using data from the <keyword id="6434522" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="1971-Census">1971 Census</keyword>. In 1976, the government started actively encouraging states to curb their <keyword id="512277" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="population-growth">population growth</keyword>.</li><li>The move hurts South Indian states since their population growth rates have been lower than the rest of the country. </li></ul> The 15th <keyword id="74136" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="finance-commission">Finance Commission</keyword> said late last year, in <a href="http://fincomindia.nic.in/ShowPDFContent.aspx">its terms of reference</a>, that it would use data from the 2011 Census on population to determine the allocation of resources to India’s states. This means that the higher a state’s population as per the estimates in 2011, the higher the amount of funds it will get from the central government to support its spending requirements. In effect, the Finance Commission, which is constituted every five years to distribute funds from the central government to states, is reversing a decades-long practice of using data from the 1971 Census for the distribution of funds, at the behest of the Centre. As a result of the proposal, less populous states in India stand to lose a significant portion of their funding from the Exchequer, for the sole fact that they have been effective at family planning. North Indian states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar whose populations have expanded rapidly since 1971 will get disproportionately larger share of funds under the proposal. This has not gone down well with states in <keyword id="6355466" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="south-india">South India</keyword>, which have some of the lowest population growth rates in the country. According to the <a href="http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/data_files/india/Final_PPT_2011_chapter3.pdf">2011 Census</a>, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Bihar, Rajasthan all grew at rates that were well in excess of 25% between 1991 and 2001, compared to Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala - all of which had a growth rate of less than 15%. Between 2001 and 2011, the discrepancy in the growth rates between Southern and Northern states was similar. Furthermore, based on data from 2008, the total fertility rates (average number of children born to a woman) of four Southern states – Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu – have consistently been less than two, which is lower than the rest the country. Even in the 1970s, the fertility rate of these states was significantly lower than the national average of 5.2. Earlier this week, the finance ministers of Kerala, Karnataka, Puducherry and Andhra Pradesh, all of which are non-BJP states, gathered in Thiruvananthapuram to declare their disapproval of the commission’s terms of reference and accuse the Centre of being biased against the South. “This is a threat to the federal system,” Thomas Isaac, the finance minister of Kerala, told media outlets. Arun Jaitley, the country’s finance minister, has sought to downplay the issue, calling it a “needless controversy”. Without giving any details, he said that the Finance Commission would recognise states that had scored well on population control and that other factors like income levels would also determine the allocation of funds. In citing income levels as a key consideration, Jaitley has likely reinforced these ministers’ fears that the development of India’s Northern states will come at the expense of their states. All six of India’s <a href="http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2016/05/26/india-states-briefs">least developed states</a>, according to the World Bank - Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh - are in North India. The Finance Commission’s use of data from the 2011 Census is not unprecedented. In 2013, the 14th Finance Commission allocated a 10% weightage to 2011 population data when determining fund allocation. Tamil Nadu was the biggest casualty of the move, as it was to have estimated to have <a href="https://thewire.in/economy/fifteenth-finance-commission-threatens-split-open-demographic-fault-lines-south-north-india">lost ₹60 billion </a>in funding. The 15th Finance Commission proposes to do away with the 1971 Census altogether in making recommendations. But why did its predecessors use census data from 44 years ago in the first place? The 42nd Amendment In accordance with the Constitution, data from the most recent census is used to determine the number of seats a state has in the Lok Sabha, the number of seats in a state legislative assembly and even the value that each vote by a state’s representative bears in the Presidential election. Hence, the higher the population of the state, the greater number of seats and the greater the value of votes. This gave state governments the incentive to let their population growth go unchecked. During the Emergency in 1976, the Congress administration imposed the 42nd amendment, which said that no changes were to be made to the total number of seats until the figures from the first census after the year 2000 were released. This was meant to encourage states to stabilise their populations without having to worry about their seats in the Lok Sabha decreasing. It made political sense to freeze allocation ratios. Hence, the 1971 Census, which was the most recent census at the time, became the default census that dictated the relationship of each state to the Centre. In 2001, the BJP-led government extended the use of the 1971 Census to 2026 in order to protect states that had effectively reduced their population growth rates. As a result, the first census after 2026, which will likely be in 2031, will finally lead to the alteration of seats in the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies and a change in the value of votes for the Presidential election. One hopes that the deadline won’t be postponed again. India’s population was 548 million according to the 1971 Census. It currently stands at 1.35 billion. It is rather disconcerting that the government has been using such antiquated population data to determine how many funds each state government should get and how much influence each state should have in the running of the country. However, at the same time, it seems unfair to deprive South Indian states of a significant amount of their funding just because they have been effective in achieving development outcomes and population control. No sign of a mutually acceptable solution The representatives of South Indian states are set to meet again in the port city of Visakhapatnam next month. Northern states that aren’t aligned to the BJP like Punjab and West Bengal as well as other South Indian states like Tamil Nadu and Telangana will be invited to the conclave. With enough support, they could pressure the central government into reframing the Finance Commission’s terms of reference. Ironically, in absence of a better option, the way forward for them would mean a regression to 1971. This would make sure that their success isn’t used against them. However, if the 15th Finance Commission continues to allocate more weightage to data from 1971 instead of 2011, it doesn’t seem far-fetched to predict a backlash from Northern Indian states, who can just as easily say that they aren’t being adequately supported given how much their populations have expanded in the last five decades. Unfortunately, like most issues in Indian politics, there doesn’t seem to be a solution that can make everyone happy.

The Finance Commission plans to start using the 2011 census instead of the 1971 census for its decision-making: Here’s why it matters

India's food subsidy regime needs to be overhauled with direct cash transfers to rein in losses in the public distribution of dietary staples to the poor, the Economic Survey said on Friday. 
 
The Economic Survey, the basis for Finance Minister Arun Jaitley's 2015/16 budget on Saturday, said reform of the food subsidies required more work. India, the world's biggest rice and wheat producer after China, runs a mammoth food welfare programme for the poor. 
 
The cost of the South Asian nation's food subsidies for the fiscal year ending March 31 are estimated to surge a quarter to $18.6 billion from the previous year. 
 
The programme covers over 65 million poor families through the distribution of subsidised food via a network of 450,000 ration shops. The state run network aims at ensuring minimum nutritional support to the poor and stability in grain prices. 
 
The annual loss of $2.98 billion in subsidies for rice and wheat, the report said, "seriously" undermines the effectiveness of distribution network. 
 
"Leakages can be stopped by cash transfer of the subsidy amount directly to the bank account, but the biggest challenge is most of the poor in India do not have any accounts at all," said Veeresh Hiremath, research head of brokerage Karvy Comtrade. 
 
The report favoured a review of state-run grain procurement policies, especially in states that pay prices higher than minimum support levels for subsidised foods and impose high levies on the purchases. 
 
The review should be extended to policies on stocking and distribution as well, the report suggested.

Eco Survey: Overhaul food subsidies to curb losses

<ul><li>During the <keyword id="7190005" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="interim-budget-2019">Interim Budget 2019</keyword>, the Modi government presented Vision 2030. </li><li>From clean Ganga to an astronaut in space and building hubs for Digital India, the Vision 2030 agenda has big plans. </li><li>The government’s current track record in some cases and the lack of details in others are uninspiring. </li></ul>Indian government’s budget for 2019-20 was supposed to be an interim vote on account before the elections in the upcoming summer. However, the government’s promises, hopes and estimation went as far as 2030. Here’s the 10-point agenda for the next decade set by Piyush Goyal, standing in for finance minister Arun Jaitley. “We are poised to become a Five Trillion Dollar Economy in the next five years and aspire to become a Ten Trillion Dollar Economy in the next 8 years thereafter.” The message from the government is that it is not just focussed on the headline growth, but also on the quality of life. “On the social infrastructure side, every family will have a roof on its head and will live in a healthy, clean and wholesome environment,” said Finance MInister Piyush Goyal. It was 2017, when prime minister Modi promised to double farmers’ income in the following five years. However, the rural distress has been one of the biggest failures of the administration. While ‘housing for all by 2022’ is still an ongoing project, there is still a lot left to desire in <a href="https://www.bloombergquint.com/global-economics/15-million-indian-households-have-meters-but-no-electricity">electrification</a> and <a href="https://www.livemint.com/Politics/d0gb1cTpVnVwJaUQIPIaaP/Swachh-Bharat-Abhiyan-Why-Indias-toilet-data-is-too-good-t.html">sanitation</a> of villages. “Digital India into every sector of the economy” There were two announcements towards digitisation of the economy – to turn 1 lakh villages into Digital Villages over next five years, and a plan to build centre of excellences for Artificial Intelligence (AI). This is not the first time the government has promised a push for AI. ₹3,073 crores were allocated for the programme in 2018-19. This fund was supposed to boost the development of artificial intelligence, robotics, big data analysis, and digital manufacturing, by setting up centres of excellences in the country. However, there has been little or no progress so far. The Indian government had allocated ₹10,000 crores in the last budget for Bharat Net phase II-- a pan-India broadband network--to create 500,000 rural wifi hotspots. By December 2018, the network had covered half the target range, but the utilisation was reportedly less <a href="https://thewire.in/government/pmo-bharatnet-project-shoddy-state-of-broadband-initiative">than 10%</a>. “Over ₹17,000 crore has been spent already on BharatNet. No results can be seen. There is no utilisation...Public money has been wasted and it will become a serious problem for the government," a senior official at Trai told <a href="https://www.livemint.com/politics/policy/trai-asks-telecom-dept-to-auction-bharatnet-assets-to-private-firms-1548698974471.html">Mint</a> in January. “This India will drive on Electric Vehicles with Renewables becoming a major source of energy supply. India will lead the world in the transport revolution through electric vehicles” India did assume the lead in the global fight against climate change after the <a href="https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/what-signing-the-paris-climate-change-treaty-means-for-india/story-RsDH1IAohQNEqRxb426YbM.html">Paris pact </a>of 2016. But the push towards green vehicles at home has had, at best, a sputtering start. While there has been a growth in demand for electric two-wheelers, only 1,200 electric cars were sold in FY 2017-18, according to a report done by the <a href="https://www.livemint.com/Politics/1x96WeyG6cCVnm5zPcUraK/Govt-proposes-incentives-to-boost-EVsalesin5-years.html">Society of Manufacturers of Electric Vehicles.</a> The main concern of the automobile companies is the lack of infrastructure for growth of EVs in India as well as the absence of <a href="https://auto.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/industry/are-indian-automakers-ditching-ev-in-want-of-clear-policy/67749150">clarity</a> regarding the EV policy. “Expanding rural industrialisation using modern digital technologies to generate massive employment” Both industrial growth and employment have been among the big failures of the Modi regime, mostly because private investment has been lacking. The most recent data in factory output growth was the lowest in 17 months. A news report based on leaked data from the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) said that India’s unemployment rate has hit a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/unemployment-in-india-is-at-its-highest-in-45-years-says-an-indian-daily-citing-an-undisclosed-jobs-survey/articleshow/67769020.cms">45-year high</a> by December 2018, with a majority of job losses seen in rural India, showing that the government’s policies have so far failed to spur industrialisation and jobs. “Our Government has worked vigorously for cleaning River Ganga. Fifth Dimension of our Vision for India of 2030 is Clean Rivers” The government has already approved ₹25,500 crores for ‘Namami Gange Mission’, but the impact has less than satisfactory, according to environmental activists. There was no additional in the current budget for the same programme. Spending crores of rupees for beautification of ghats has been "wastage of the public exchequer" because "without ensuring a continuous flow, clean Ganga will continue to remain a distant dream", said <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/why-indias-waterman-thinks-the-governments-3-5-billion-plan-to-clean-up-ganga-is-not-working/articleshow/67672185.cms">Rajendra Singh,</a> who goes by the sobriquet "Waterman of India". “Our efforts in the Sagarmala programme will be scaled up and we will develop other inland waterways faster.” According to a reply to a right-to-information petition filed in 2018, it was <a href="https://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/sagarmala-drives-in-slow-lane-only-1-5-projects-completed-since-fy16-118091700931_1.html">reported</a> that just 80 projects had been completed out of the 220 projects envisioned under the Sagar Mala project, over three years after its inception. “Placing an Indian astronaut into space by 2022” The ISRO chief K Sivan in a press conference last month had <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/indias-first-manned-mission-to-space-may-have-women-too/articleshow/67486206.cms">announced</a> that under the Gaganyaan mission,a three-member team will be sent to space which could also include a woman astronaut. It’s too soon to evaluate the progress of this plan. “High farm production and productivity will be achieved through modern agricultural practices and value addition” India, a country which has over 45% of its population employed in agriculture, is also a major exporter. According to <a href="https://www.ibef.org/exports/agriculture-and-food-industry-india.aspx">reports</a>, during April-October 2018, exports of agricultural and processed food products totalled US$ 21.61 billion. India now faces the problem of <a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/agrarian-crisis-farmer-protests-rural-distress-surplus-production-crop-procurement-the-age-of-surplus-5213499/">surplus</a>, where farmers are ready to answer the demand for more produce. However, the farmer has not been in the winning end of the deal. A report of the Committee on Strategy for Doubling Farmers' Income by 2022 <a href="https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/agriculture/you-may-pay-a-steep-price-but-does-the-farmer-make-any-money--62364">states </a>that “The WPI (wholesale price index) of food articles was lower than that of agricultural inputs for most years, indicating that farmers received lower market prices for agricultural commodities than the prices paid for the purchase of inputs.” “Aiming at healthy society with an environment of health assurance and the support of necessary health infrastructure” The Indian government had announced its ambitious Ayushman Bharat scheme in 2018. The Finance Minister during his budget speech announced that so far ₹3000 crore had been allocated to Ayushman Bharat which has benefited over 10 lakh people. However, many states have pulled out of the scheme criticising it for legitimate and political reasons. As the minister from Chhattisgarh explained, Ayushman Bharat provided insurance for secondary and tertiary healthcare in hospitals, whereas <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/healthcare/chhattisgarh-govt-to-pull-out-of-ayushman-bharat/articleshow/67550227.cms">nearly 80%</a> of the state’s citizens required primary healthcare services. Outpatient treatment, which is hugely popular with India’s poor households according to <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/201612_health-and-morbidity.pdf">a Brookings report</a>, isn’t provided under the scheme. In addition, as public hospitals lack the requisite infrastructure, the government is relying heavily on private hospitals, which aren’t that widespread in semi-urban and rural areas and can promote expensive treatments to improve their margins “Transforming India into a Minimum Government Maximum Governance nation” ‘Minimum Government Maximum Governance’ was one of the many slogans that Modi came up with ahead of the 2014 elections. Indeed, he managed to reduce the layers in bureaucracy and made processes simpler in many cases. It helped India to rise to the <a href="http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=184513">77th position</a> in the ease of doing business ranking assessed by the World Bank, up from 142 in 2014. Yet, the spirit of the slogan does not pervade all parts of the government. For instance, startups, which mushroomed in India in the years where there was no focussed regulation, have now hit a wall with the infamous ‘angel tax’. Early stage investors who back these startups were burdened with higher tax in a bid to control money laundering. The sweeping tax on all angel investors hurt new investments in startups. Even the steps taken to assuage the concern has only added to the layers of permission required to start a new business. See Also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/income-tax-slabs-for-2019-20/articleshow/67788923.cms">No tax proposed on annual income up to ₹500,000</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/the-indian-government-just-announced-its-highest-ever-outlay-for-defence/articleshow/67789219.cms">The Indian government just announced its highest ever outlay for defence</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/budget-2019-income-tax-and-other-benefits-for-middle-class-in-india/articleshow/67789294.cms">Here is how the Budget 2019 benefits the Indian middle class</a>

India’s Narendra Modi has a grand vision for 2030 – but it is short on details

The distressed investors of <keyword id="6405757" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="NSEL">NSEL</keyword> have alleged foul play and have sought clarification from the Mumbai police regarding the investigation into the scam. The investors believe that the evidence against key accused <keyword id="154840" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Jignesh-Shah">Jignesh Shah</keyword> and other <keyword id="6405755" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="FTIL">FTIL</keyword> (Financial Technologies India Ltd) directors have been tampered with by people privy to the investigation. 
	 “The investigation in NSEL scam by Mumbai police is slowly turning into a farce and a sick joke on 13,000 helpless families, who expected justice and timely-fair investigation from Mumbai Police,” said <keyword id="6558736" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ketan-Shah">Ketan Shah</keyword> of NSEL Investors Action Group, an association of 13,000 investors affected by the scam. 
	 
	The association wrote the letter following a report that stated that the Mumbai Police was recovering crucial data regarding the scam and FTIL’s role in it. However, on interacting with the investigating officers, the investors were informed that NSEL servers had never crashed. “This is shocking as this is in direct contravention of what had appeared in the reports and what all investors were continuously led to believe. This crash of server and them being sent to Bangalore was also confirmed by Anjani Sinha in his statement dated October 21, 2013…”, said Shah in the letter. (Also read <a href="file:///C:\Users\purba.das\Desktop\Work\NSEL%20Investors%20Allege%20Foul%20Play.docx">http://www.businessinsider.in/NSELInvestors-Allege-EOW-Soft-On-Borrowers-In-Rs-5600-Crore-Scam/articleshow/45021197.cms</a>) 
	 
	He further alleged that the server that contained crucial data regarding the operations of the NSEL scam has been tampered by FTIL employees stationed in the premises of the Economic Office Wing (EOW) office. 
	 
	“You may be aware that mirror servers of NSEL are installed at EOW 5 premises and FTIL employees are handling it. This violates any sense of propriety- common sense and basic principles of investigation as FTIL and NSEL directors are accused and their employees should not even be in the vicinity of investigation office. In spite of our several reminders to remove all NSEL and FTIL employees from EOW 5… they are continuously allowed to sit there making them privy to all investigation plans and progress,” noted Shah. 
	 
	Besides, Babloo Tarwale, the person assigned for handling NSEL servers at EOW 5 from FTIL, recently revealed that NSEL servers had ‘never crashed’ and has called the reports false. The investors have urged the police to thoroughly investigate Tarwale for his role in management of NSEL servers as well as ensure that EOW data has not been tampered with. 
	 
	The investors have also sent the letter to the Prime Minister’s Office, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, ED Delhi, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Home Minister of Maharashtra, ED Mumbai and joint commissioner of Mumbai Police (crime).

NSEL Investors Allege Foul Play, Seek Clarification

NEW DELHI: BJP appeared to be bracing for fresh turmoil in the run-up to <keyword id="6355187" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="40" keywordseo="Lok-Sabha">Lok Sabha</keyword> polls after L K Advani expressed disinclination to seek re-election from <keyword id="6356847" type="CITY" weightage="40" keywordseo="gandhinagar">Gandhinagar</keyword> in Narendra Modi-ruled Gujarat. 
 Although the central leadership turned down the request and sought to put a lid on the matter by announcing Advani’s candidature from Gandhinagar, the party leadership was keeping its fingers crossed. According to late-night reports, Advani has indicated that he would rather wait for the party central election committee to respond to his request to contest from <keyword id="6355556" type="COMPANY" weightage="40" keywordseo="bhopal">Bhopal</keyword>. 
 Advani’s desire, conveyed to <keyword id="114039" type="POSITION" weightage="40" keywordseo="BJP-chief">BJP chief</keyword> <keyword id="6355121" type="PERSON" weightage="40" keywordseo="Rajnath-Singh">Rajnath Singh</keyword> on Monday, to switch constituencies came as a surprise to the party because of his consistent public stand that he would fight only from Gandhinagar: the constituency which he has won since 1991. He had stated this as recently as on February 28 when the party announced its first list of candidates. 
 
The decision of the central election committee came after day-long drama that seemed to bring to the fore the bitter resistance of a section in BJP to Modi’s leadership. The saffron senior kept away from the deliberations on the ground that his candidature was under discussion even as reports swirled through the day about his reluctance to contest from Gandhinagar. 
 After the committee’s meeting, senior leaders <keyword id="6355111" type="PERSON" weightage="40" keywordseo="Sushma-Swaraj">Sushma Swaraj</keyword> and <keyword id="26680" type="PERSON" weightage="40" keywordseo="Nitin-gadkari">Nitin Gadkari</keyword> met Advani to convey the party’s decision. General secretary Thawarchand Gehlot soon announced the decision to signal that the nomination for Gandhinagar, so far as the leadership is concerned, was a closed chapter. 
 
READ ALSO: <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/specials/lok-sabha-elections-2014/news/BJP-attempts-to-placate-Advani-after-he-conveys-displeasure-over-Gandhinagar-LS-seat/articleshow/32319237.cms">BJP attempts to placate Advani</a> 
 Yet, there was wariness about what Advani might do, with party circles speculating whether the <keyword id="6355554" type="COMPANY" weightage="40" keywordseo="Madhya-Pradesh">Madhya Pradesh</keyword> unit may recommend him for the Bhopal seat. 
 
Amid growing uncertainty, Modi had a meeting with RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat at the Sangh’s Jhandewalan office in the capital. Several assumptions were being put forward in party circles for Advani’s desire to move away from Gandhinagar after having often emphasized his closed links to Gujarat, saying his family had settled there after moving from Karachi and it was home. 
 Many in the party felt the attempted switch was meant to signal his autonomy of Modi and to emphasize that he could win from any constituency of his choice. With Madhya Pradesh already playing host to Sushma Swaraj, who represents Vidisha and whose equations with Modi are seen as tense, the desire to move to Bhopal was also suspected to be an attempt to raise a parallel axis vis-à-vis the ascendant troika of Modi, party chief Rajnath Singh and <keyword id="19496" type="POSITION" weightage="40" keywordseo="leader">leader</keyword> of opposition in Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley. 
 Party circles have for some time sniffed an effort to set up <keyword id="6355553" type="POSITION" weightage="40" keywordseo="MP">MP</keyword> chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan as a counterpoint to Modi. The tussle in the party over Modi’s projection as PM candidate saw Advani suggesting that Chouhan’s performance as CM surpassed Modi’s as Chouhan had turned around Madhya Pradesh which, unlike Gujarat, was a BIMARU state. 
 
Some in the party also saw the move to shift constituency as reflective of Advani camp’s fear that his campaign may be subverted by workers who may look to proactively scuttle any post-poll trouble for Modi. Although Modi camp would have ensured that Advani won comfortably to ward off the charge of sabotage, workers remain apprehensive of the intent of Modi’s opponents in the party. 
 Fearing that Advani’s shfit to Bhopal could be projected as another instance of senior leaders being humiliated under the Modi-Rajanth dispensation, the official faction had swung into action to dissuade Advani soon after he conveyed his keenness on Bhopal. The <keyword id="1589638" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="40" keywordseo="Gujarat-party">Gujarat party</keyword> recommended just Advani’s name for Gandhinagar on Monday. On Tuesday, former party MP from Gujarat Vijay Rupani publicized the state unit’s insistence that the party veteran stick with Gandhinagar. 
 
Sources close to the leadership saw the sudden change in Advani’s preference as underscoring the tenacity of the resistance that Modi faces from “determined hold-outs”. In recent weeks, Swaraj openly opposed the decision to re-admit Karnataka leader B Sriramulu. She not only tweeted her reservations but followed that up with another tweet after Sriramulu joined the party. 
 
But just as it has firmly overruled the protests of senior leaders like M M Joshi who had to make way for Modi in Varanasi, the ascendant BJP leadership does not seem ready to cater to Advani’s bid to shift to Bhopal. 
 
The meeting of the election committee saw several attendees emphasizing the point that the Gujarat unit had unanimously endorsed him as the candidate for Gandhinagar. 
 
Whether Advani, having “recused” himself from the meeting on the ground that it would be improper for him to participate in the deliberations when his name was under consideration, will insist on having his way despite the decision remains a tricky question. 
 
However, the way the battle of wits ends will be shaped by what stance Chouhan takes, particularly whether Sangh uses its leverage with him to nip any trouble from the Madhya Pradesh unit.

You Searched For "arun jaitley family" and got 10 results

What Is dividend distribution tax and what has changed with DDT in budget 2020

BI India Bureau

India's 'Modicare' insurance scheme needs some fixing

Dilsher Dhillon

Here are India’s cabinet ministers who were appointed in 2014

BI India Bureau

Here’s a comparison of the election sops offered by the BJP and the Congress

Dilsher Dhillon

Here are 15 key reforms announced by FM to transform India

BI India Bureau

The Finance Commission plans to start using the 2011 census instead of the 1971 census for its decision-making: Here’s why it matters

Dilsher Dhillon

Eco Survey: Overhaul food subsidies to curb losses

Reuters

India’s Narendra Modi has a grand vision for 2030 – but it is short on details

Sanchita Dash

NSEL Investors Allege Foul Play, Seek Clarification

Purba Das

Turmoil In BJP Over Advani’s Bid To Shift To Bhopal

Times Of India