z:\ ambedkar\vol-02\vol2-10.indd MK SJ+YS 21-9-2013/YS-8-11-2013 770
770 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: That is so.
†8527. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Under the White Paper there is no means raising, say, one anna for Provincial purposes without raising in those circumstances another anna, which ex-hypothesis is not needed, for Federal purposes. The other hypothesis is that the Provinces do not need any more income-tax, but the Federal Government does and you then have to raise double the amount (assume that the percentage prescribed is 50 : 50) you have to raise two annas in order that the Federal Government may get one because, for every one it takes, it must give one to the Provinces, even though they do not want it ?
Sir Samuel Hoare: I will take all these points into account. I would ask the members of the Committee to remember that there must be (whatever the arrangements) anomalies. I do not say exactly of the kind contemplated in the White Paper, but anomalies of some kind under any system under which the income-tax is shared between the Centre and the Provinces.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: May I draw the attention of the Secretary of State and Sir Austen Chamberlain to two points ? Sir Austen said there is no provision for the Province to raise any income-tax if it wanted it for its own purposes. I wish to draw his attention to Proposal 139, and what appears in the brackets, “A prescribed percentage, not being less than 50 per cent, nor more than 75 per cent of the net revenues derived from the sources specified in the margin.”
Sir Samuel Hoare: That is the income-tax—“(exclusive of any surcharges imposed by the Provinces).” I take it from that the Provinces will have the right to levy a surcharge on the income-tax for their purposes.
Sir A. P. Patro: In addition.
- Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: That is Proposal 139 ?
Sir Samuel Hoare: That is so, and the Committee will see that we alluded to it at the top of page 30 of the Introduction.
- Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: May I draw the attention of the Secretary of State to a statement that he made just now, that with regard to the imposition of surcharges for Federal purposes on the income, I think he said the key to the position was the previous sanction of the GovernorGeneral. I would like to draw his attention to the fact that Proposal 141 does not stipulate that the previous sanction of the Governor-General will be required to surcharges for Federal purposes. The previous sanction of the Governor-General refers to revenues assigned to the Provinces, namely, those enumerated in Proposals 138 and 139. Paragraph 141 is not made dependent on the previous consent of the Governor-General ?
Sir Samuel Hoare: I think Dr. Ambedkar is quite right, and I must look into my answer in connection with the note I will circulate.
Sir Akbar Hydari: There is also Head 49 in the exclusively Federal heads
†Minutes of Evidence, Vol. II-B, 28th July 1933, pp. 1002-03.