Trying out Sanskrit Literature

For some time, I have thinking of reading something that lies outside my usual basket of reading. I toyed with the idea of reading the Greek epics Illiad and Odyssey. But a few months have passed with no effort to start reading them, so I guess that's that. The next brainwave is to read Sanskrit literature. 

Insofar I can make out, Sanskrit literature can be grouped into 3 lumps: 

1. Shruti: The ancient Vedic literature consisting of Rig, Yajur, Sam and Atharva Ved, and each set having its own Samhita, Upanishad, Aaranyak and Braahman texts. The Samhita contain the mantra that they recite in yagya, the Upanishads contain philosophy about Aatma, Brahm, etc. I am yet to look at any Aaranyak or Braahman texts.  

2. Smriti: This consists of Ramayan, Mahabharat, various Purans and texts like ManuSmriti, Yagyavalkya Smriti, etc. Contemporary Hindu customs derive majorly from Smriti texts.  Within this set, Geeta, a chapter of Mahabharat, stands out and is the subject matter of my initial interest.  

3. Other texts: These include poetry by Kalidas and philosophical treatise by Badarayan. Then, there are the commentaries (bhaashya) on various Shruti and Smriti texts. There is this entire post- Budhha period where scholars explainer their ideas not by writing independent books but by writing bhaashya on existing works. Older bhaashya are lost. So for us, this phase starts with 8th century philosopher Shankar [i.e. Aadi Shankaracharya] who commented on Geeta, Upanishads and Badarayan's Brahm Sutra, interpreting each to push forward his ideas of Advait Vedant. (Shankar is also the author of a remarkable short poem 'Aatma Shatakam'.) Other major commentators on Geeta and Upanishads include Ramanuj, Madhav, Abhinavgupt and Madhusudan Saraswati, each heartily disagreeing with Shankar and also with each other. There is also an interesting work called 'Sarva Darshana Sangraha' by Maadhav or Vidyaranya, which summarizes the ideas of all the major schools of philosophies into one place.  On the Samhita, the only major surviving bhaashya is by the 14th century Sayan.

We were forced to study Sanskrit for 3 years in school. I gave it up once we had the option to choose between Hindi and Sanskrit. So, my knowledge of Sanskrit is limited to a rudimentary familiarity of its grammar. So, I turned to books containing Sanskrit texts with Hindi translation. I tried to. 

There are many people in India who try to force Hindi upon the non-Hindi speaking population. Such people also have a penchant for giving speeches about preserving India's rich cultural heritage. You would think they would have done something to ensure availability of Hindi translations for notable works in Sanskrit. You would be wrong.  

Only a handful of Smriti have easily available translations. The position of Shruti is far worse. This is not because nobody translated these works into Hindi. It is just that in the Hindi-speaking world, there is no market for such works. Books went out of print, now lying in inaccessible corners of old libraries. Some of these books survive now on archive.org as scanned pages.

Publishers who sold such works either changed tack or went out of business. The big exception is Gorakhpur-based Gita Press: they been churning out Hindi translations of major Smriti texts. Apparently, the founders knew this was not sustainable and tied funding to revenues from other properties. If you take books by Gita Press out of the mix, you are left with practically no content in Hindi. 

 

Gita Press has also done half-translations of Shankar's bhaashya on Geeta and Upanishads, as well as Ramanuj's bhaashya on Geeta. I call them half-translations because they just repeat the Sanskrit words in Hindi grammar. Still, it is great that Gita Press published them, else I would be forced to read English texts to access Shankar and Ramanuj. 

You wouldn't find Hindi translations of bhaashya by philosophers like Madhav, Abhinavgupt, etc. This is a problem.  If these commentaries are inaccessible, entire schools of philosophy gets inaccessible. 

Meanwhile, the pandits are happy reciting crammed up mantra, no pandit will bother to find out the meaning of the verses, so there is no need for a Hindi translations of Sayan's bhaashya explaining each mantra.  

I strongly prefer Hindi texts, nuances are lost in translations from Sanskrit to English.  But except for  a handful of Smriti, translations of Sanskrit texts are much more easily available in English. Bloody colonials!

Tweet

Second Generation GST Reforms

by CA. Sandeep Choudhary

63662 57036

sandeepchoudharyfca@gmail.com

1. Bring Electricity under GST ambit. Scrap other taxes on power.

2. Bring petroleum products under GST. Reduce excise and sales tax correspondingly to retain total tax incidence at current levels.

3. Bring Real Estate under GST. Scrap stamp duties. Create suitable mechanism to allow homeowners to adjust GST on sale of a house with GST paid at the time of purchase, without requiring GST registration.

4. Merge 12% and 18% to 15%.

5. Identify limited number of luxury/ sin goods for higher rate. Bring down other items like cement to standard rate.

6. Amend GST Acts to delegate Rule-making power to GST Council instead of respective Governments. Reduce gap between de jure and de facto.

7. Stop forcing small businesses to get a fake address for registered office. Understand that electricity & water department have their own weird ways for names and addresses.

8. Provide a mechanism to rectify revenue-neutral errors (tax credit taken under wrong head or wrong period, tax paid under different head, error in name of relevant State etc) without hassle. When such errors are identified by authorities, they should be required to send a request to reclassify the item under the correct head instead of demanding tax. 

9. Require appellate officers to collate all types of appeals to identify areas where you can improve law to reduce litigation and bona fide errors. 

10. Open up GST Council meetings to public. Publish detailed minutes, including minutes of committee meetings.

Pacific Adventure

Sanskriti and Pranay were enjoying their boat ride in the Pacific. The blue waters stretched all around them. The only other object they could make out was a distant yacht. Then they saw a dolphin jump. They were both very excited; they had seen some dolphins in the distance but this one was frolicking in the water quite close to them. ‘I did not know dolphins were so huge’, said Pranay. ‘This is what, 3 metres long?’

‘Something like that’, replied Sanskriti, tilting her head. She waved and said ‘Hey-lo dolphin!’. Pranay sniggered and said ‘Hi dolphin, how are you doing, catch any nice fish today?’ while waving his hand. The dolphin suddenly turned and waved its flipper at them.

The children were amazed. The dolphin came closer, till it was almost touching the boat and said, ‘Naa! No particularly nice fish today. I did have two squids in the morning, though. Do you have any fish for me?’

Both the kids started talking simultaneously:

‘Wow! You can talk!’

‘Where did you learn that?’

‘Can all dolphins talk?’

‘Sorry! We don’t have any fish.’

‘Do you have any kids?’

‘We have some biscuits and chocolates.’

‘Are you married?’

‘We also have Kurkure.’

‘I don’t eat junk,’ said the dolphin. ‘I only eat healthy things like fish, shrimps and octopus. That is why I am so fit and can jump so smoothly’. It jumped over their little boat to make the point.

‘Wow!’ said Sanskriti. ‘I will also eat only healthy food from now and learn to jump like this. But I don’t want to eat shrimps and stuff. I will eat what is healthy for humans.’

‘You are a good kid. But what is this noise?’ The dolphin turned suddenly looking here and there.

Sanskriti raised her eyebrow at Pranay. He explained that dolphins can hear sounds that humans can’t. Sanskriti immediately countered, ‘What about you? Can you also hear sounds that humans can’t?’, and started laughing. Pranay gave a bored, exasperated look. Sanskriti kept laughing loudly till she saw some things jump out of water into the yacht at a distance.

‘You kids stay here. This looks ugly,’ the dolphin told them and disappeared beneath the water. The kids could now make out that some sort of fighting was going on in the yacht. They notice another boat coming near the yacht. Someone jumps from yacht into the water, dragging another person with him, and swims to the boat. Fight now breaks out in the boat and they are both again in the water. Finally, the dolphin knocks out the attacker while the other person gets back into the yacht.

The dolphin returns to the kids’ boat. ‘What was all that?’ asked Pranay. The dolphin shrugged its flipper.

‘You are bruised’, noted Sanskriti. Pranay pulled a bottle out of their first aid kit and poured something over the bruising. ‘What’s this?’ asked the dolphin. ‘It will help you heal,’ Sanskriti explained. She noted that while it seemed black initially, the dolphin was actually bluish-grey in colour.

‘I like you kids’, it said. ‘Have you ever had a dolphin ride?’

‘We would love that. But we can’t breathe under water,’ said Sanskriti.

‘Neither can I. That’s why I keep coming back to the surface. You need to take a deep breath when you surface and hold it when you are underwater’, replied the dolphin.

Pranay looked at Sanskriti mockingly and said, ‘You did not know this?’ Sanskriti replied ‘Me first!’ and jumped into the water. The dolphin stayed still as Sanskriti struggled and finally managed to sit on the dolphin.

Its skin was smooth and rubbery. Sanskriti had to lie on her tummy to try to hold its body with her arms and legs. ‘Remember, take a deep breath when your snout is in the air’, it said. ‘He he he, Sanskriti has a snout’, laughed Pranay. The dolphin dived.

‘Glug Glug Glug’

The dolphin surfaced.

‘Yehhhhhhhhh!!!’

The dolphin was back in the water.

‘Glug Glug Glug’

followed by

‘Yehhhhhhhhh!!!’

 

This went on for a few minutes. Then, Sanskriti dismounted and Pranay sat on the dolphin.

‘Glug Glug Glug’

‘Yehhhhhhhhh!!!’

‘Glug Glug Glug’

‘Yehhhhhhhhh!!!’

‘Glug Glug Glug’

‘Yehhhhhhhhh!!!’

They both had a lot of fun, and the dolphin enjoyed with them. When the kids were tired, they applied another round of medicine to the dolphin. It waved its flipper at them and disappeared beneath the water. They saw it surface near the yacht. ‘It is probably checking on the passenger it had saved’, they thought.

Happy Birthday Sanskriti

Lots of love from Papa

9^th March 2025

 

Tweet

Income Tax Bill: Transitional Provisions

by CA. Sandeep Choudhary

63662 57036

sandeepchoudharyfca@gmail.com

This article summarises the Transitional Provisions in the Income Tax Bill, 2025. An earlier article discussed some key features on the proposed law.

1. Proceedings already started under the 1961 Act will continue to be governed by that Act. Any notice or proceeding relating to period before 1st April 2026 will be carried out under the old law. Thus, if assessments of older periods are re-opened, they will be governed by the 1961 Act.

2. If you opted for Old Regime instead of the default New Regime, your choice shall continue to be applicable in the 2025 Bill. 

3. Interest provisions will be governed by 1961 Act till 31st March 2025 and by the new Bill thereafter. This means, that while the demand notice or refund order will be under the 1961 Act, part of the interest computation will be under the new Bill. 

4. If you have claimed any deduction in 1961 Act and its conditions are later violated, the corresponding amount will be added back to your income under the new law in the year of violation. For example, if you have received Capital Gains exemption in PY 2024-25 on account of investing in new capital asset and such asset is sold in TY 2026-27, the exemption granted earlier will become chargeable as Capital Gain in TY 2026-27. 

5. There is no specific provision which tells us what happens if the reverse happens. If some expenses are disallowed u/s 43B on grounds of non-payment, they are normally allowable under the year of payment. Similarly, if expense is disallowed on the grounds that TDS was not deducted, the expense is allowed in the year of payment. The Bill is silent where expense was disallowed under the 1961 Act and conditions for allowing expense after the new law comes into effect. It only covers the situations where an income is to be added in later years. 

6. Recognition to approved Charitable Trusts, etc (referred to as Registered Non-Profit Organisations in the new Bill) shall continue to be valid. 

7. MAT Credit under 1961 Act will continue to be available under the new law. Similarly, brought-forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation from 1961 Act will be allowable. The time limits for set-off of losses will remain unchanged. 

There is one important change here. For capital losses brought forward from 1961 Act, the distinction between Long-Term and Short-Term has been eliminated. Thus, in 1961 Act, Long-Term capital losses can be set-off against Long-Term Gains only. The same is the case for Long-Term loss under the new law. However, the Long-Term loss brought forward from 1961 Act will be available for set-off against both Long-Term and Short-Term Capital Gains under the new law. 

8. For search cases, the transition may result in a tricky situations.  Block assessment may be under one law, tax under normal provisions may be under another law. Determining the quantum of undisclosed income will require simultaneously juggling the provisions of both the laws. 

a. Where search is initiated prior to 1.4.2026, the 1961 Act will apply as if the new law had not been enacted. Thus, if search is initiated in March 2026, and the last Panchnama is drawn April 2026, the income of April 2026 till the date of signing will be taxed under the 1961 Act and not the new law. 

b. For searches initiated 1.4.2026 onwards, the entire Block Assessment will be governed by the new law. This will be so even though the income of a part of the Block Period was otherwise taxable under the 1961 Act. Since preceding 6 Tax Years are covered under Block Period, the old law will remain relevant till TY 2031-32 for search cases. 

9. Section 536(2)(a) and (b) are clumsily worded. These are important clauses in Transitional Provisions that provide finality to operations, orders, rights and obligations under 1961 Act. These clauses need to be properly worded.

10. Existing Instructions and Notifications will remain valid unless they are inconsistent with the new Act. The law is silent on the fate of existing Circulars.

11. Across laws, there is a large body of judgements confirming that old judicial precedents remain valid if the language and context is consistent. In the last decade, case laws have flowed smoothly in Company law from the 1956 Act to the 2013 Act and in Indirect Taxes from Service Tax to GST. 

Thus, case laws evolved over decades will remain applicable. However, minor changes in language will unnecessarily force fresh litigation, as discussed in preceding article.

Tweet

Income Tax Bill, 2025: Second Set of Observations

by CA. Sandeep Choudhary

63662 57036

sandeepchoudharyfca@gmail.com

This is my second post on the new Income Tax Bill, 2025. An earlier post captured my preliminary observations. 

1. Tax Holiday for 1 Year to all? 

The first section of the Bill says that the new law will call info effect from 1st April 2026. The last section says that the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby repealed. Since no separate date is given here, it means that the 1961 Act shall stand repealed from 1st April 2026. This creates a problem. 

Under section 4 of the 1961 Act, income tax is charged on Assessment Year (AY) basis for income in the previous year (PY). If the law stands repealed from 1st April 2026, there will be no AY 2026-27 in which tax on income of PY 2025-26 can be computed. And the 2025 Bill does not envisage taxing income for Tax Year 2025-26. A literal reading of the first and last sections of the 2025 Bill imply that there will be no Income Tax for the year 2025-26 for any person.  

Obviously, this is not how the situation will unfold. Section 535 of the Bill empowers the Central Government to issue 'Removal of Difficulties Order'. In 2017, similar powers in GST law were used to address obvious lacuna and implementation issues. We will see a repeat of issue of such orders in 2026-27. 

So, no, Nirmala Ji is not giving a tax break to all. However, since the Removal of Difficulties Order will be issued after the new law comes into effect, it creates some ambiguity for income for the PY 2025-26. 

2. Petty Changes?

As noted in the earlier post, Explanations and Proviso have either been converted into separate clauses or clubbed with the underlying provision using the word 'where'. Similarly, the word 'notwithstanding' has been replaced by 'irrespective of'. In a law where every word, punctuation mark and nuance gets heavily litigated, this can be problematic. 'Proviso' are a well-understood concept, they limit, modify or explain the main part. That is to say, it is restricted in scope to the underlying provision in which it is carving out a change.  Converting a Proviso into a separate clause can expand the scope of its text, which may not be the intention here. 

Other minor changes may have more impact. Replacing 'reasonably attributable' with 'attributable', 'wholly or substantially the whole' with 'wholly or substantially' change the scope of the provisions. 

Currently, the law permits taxpayers to apply for lower of NIL rate of TDS. In practice, even where NIL rate is ought, tax authorities impose a small rate of say, 0.5%. The new Bill converts this de facto position into de jure: the Bill provides only for application for lower rate and not NIL rate. It could be argued that NIL is indeed a lower rate, but it is likely that when the utility is updated, the option to fill the requested rate will not permit zero figure.  

3. Unpaid Taxes

U/s 43B of the 1961 Act, unpaid taxes are disallowed even if the amount was not payable in the PY under the relevant law. Thus, GST of March 2024 payable in April 2024 but not paid by due date of filing return would be disallowed in the computation of income for PY 23-24.  No such provision has been provided under the corresponding section 37 of the 2025 Bill. A taxpayer could therefore make the argument that the GST liability for March 2027 is not a sum payable in the TY 26-27 and hence need not be added back even if it remains unpaid on the due date of filing return. 

4. Indexation for Real Estate

In the Budget for 2024, the benefit of indexation u/s 48 was proposed to be removed. Correspondingly, a lower rate of 12.5% was mooted. After much brouhaha, a further amendment was introduced stating that old provisions will apply if they result in lower tax for land/ building. Thus, indexation continues to be applicable for land/ building in many cases. The new section 72 of the 2025 Bill simply states that indexation will be applicable in 'prescribed cases'. This is a case of excessive delegation of legislative power to tax department.  

5. No Refund if Return not Filed within Due Date?

Filing of Income Tax Return (ITR) is covered u/s 263 of the new Bill. Section 263(1)(ix) states that a person intending to make a claim of refund shall file return on or before due date. It appears that a person filing belated return may not be eligible for refund. No such restriction exists under the 1961 Act. Even the refund provisions in the new Bill do not refer to any such condition. The condition is flowing from the section on filing of returns. 

6. No addition by CPC on the basis of TDS info

Currently, when ITR is processed by CPC, it has the power to make additions based on information in Form 26AS, Form 16A and Form 16. This power has not been given to the CPC in the new Bill. This appears contrary to the general trend of speedy automation. 

7. Drafting Anomalies  

a. For presumptive taxation, eligible assessee is defined under section 58(10). The conditions here should have been cumulative. However, in the current draft, each condition ends with the word 'or' instead of 'and'. This would imply that the taxpayer can claim various deductions currently not available under presumptive taxation, and is probably not whatthe Govt intends to do.  

b. Now that the New Regime is the default option, the charging section in the Bill could have directly referred to it. However, section 4 of the new Bill continues to refer to Finance Acts for charge of Income Tax. Surprisingly, the clause 'subject to the provisions of this Act' has been removed. Thus, the charging section does not refer to the New Regime or any of the special rates (such as for Capital Gains). 

c. In Royalty payable by Non-Resident, the 1961 Act refers to income from any source in India. The new Bill refers to income from any source outside India. This is an obvious error. 

c. Section 78(3) of the new Bill defines the word 'assessable' for the purposes of the section. However, the word in not used in the section. 

Tweet