z:\ ambedkar\vol-02\vol2-02.indd MK SJ+YS 21-9-2013/YS-8-11-2013 23
ON BUDGET 23
theatre. Because, if a tax was levied on the cinema or on the theatre it would certainly be passed on, if not borne by the consumer, upon the persons who go to the theatres and to the cinemas. That would be taxation on luxuries and I am sure, although, I cannot be absolutely accurate, that instead of spreading the tax as the Honourable the Finance Minister has done upon householders, if he had increased the rate upon cinema and on theatre he would have got all the revenue that he intended to get out of this duty. But as I said it is an extraordinary thing that the party which has got the broadest back to bear this is exempt, and what is done ? What is done is this : that those persons who were hitherto consuming less than 12 units are now taxed, and those who consume more than 12 units, their taxation is increased from 9 pies to 15 pies. Sir, I do not understand the equity of the distribution of this taxation measure. Why is it that people who were hitherto exempt because they consumed less than 12 units are now taxed ? Why is it that those who bore only 9 pies (5 Nps.) are now made to pay 15 pies (8 Nps.), while the theatres and the cinemas are exempted from the operation of this measure ?
With regard to the third item of taxation which is, Stamp Duty on Conveyances, the increase, to my mind, is quite unjustified. In Bombay City, the Honourable the Finance Minister proposes to increase the tax from 3½ per cent. to 4 per cent. which is an increase of 20 per cent. on the present basis. In Poona and Ahmedabad he proposes a tax from 2¼ per cent, to 3 per cent. which is also an increase of 20 per cent. In other towns, which are to be notified by the Government, the tax is to be raised from 1½ per cent. to 3 per cent. which is an increase of 50 per cent., and in the rest of the towns it is to be raised from 1½ per cent, to 2, which is 33½ per cent. Reading the Honorabue Minister’s Statement of Objects and Reasons which is attached to the Finance Bill, I do not find any explanation as to the justification for the increase of this taxation. All that the Honourable Minister chooses to say is this : that it is considered desirable that the stamp duty for conveyances should be higher in urban areas than in rural areas. Why is it desirable, why the urban areas are more sinful that they should be made to pay more than what they have been paying so far, we have had no answer from the Honourable Minister at all. It is a simple arbitrary act saying that the tax shall be increased without any rhyme or reason.
Then we come to the fifth proposal, that is the property tax. This of course, is the crux of the whole taxing proposal. Now this proposal, to my mind, is objectionable from the various points of view. My honourable friend Mr. Jamnadas Mehta has already pointed out one of the objections to this measure, and that objection is this : that this Government is now encroaching upon a basis of taxation which has hitherto been left for the Municipal governments. The Bombay City Municipality derives a large part of its revenue from taxation on property. Not only the Bombay Municipality derives its revenue from property tax, but similarly all the City