DRAFT CONSTITUTION 825
is to say, he is prepared to leave with the President full and complete discretion to modify any allocation made to the provinces by the Centre out of the proceeds of the excise duty and the grants made by the Centre under article 255. If I understood him correctly, he would have no difficulty if the President, by order, completely wiped off any share that the Centre was bound to give in normal times to the provinces out of the proceeds of the excise duties and the grants made by the Centre.
Pandit Hirday Nath Kunzru (United Provinces : General) : I never said any such thing.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Your amendment is limited only to the income-tax. That is what I am trying to point out. You do not by your amendment, in any way suggest that there should be any different method of dealing with the proceeds of the excise duties or the grants made by the Centre under article 255.
Pandit Hirday Nath Kunzru : The reason why I cast my amendment in that form is this. In so far as the distribution of the proceeds of any taxes depends on a statute passed by Parliament that power cannot be taken away from Parliament but it does not belong to the President. But so far as income-tax is concerned, the Government of India Act, 1935, envisaged the transfer of the full share of the provinces to them within a certain period and allowed the Governor-General, in case there was an emergency, to delay the transfer to the provinces and thus lengthen the total period in which the provinces were to get their full share. That was the only reason ; the inference drawn by my honourable Friend is completely unjustified.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am entitled to draw the most natural inference from the amendment as tabled.
Pandit Hirday Nath Kunzru : The Honourable Member is completely misunderstanding me. Under my amendment the President will have no power to alter the distribution of the proceeds of the Union excise duties.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am sorry the honourable Member did not make the matter clear in his amendment. And if he wants to put a new construction now and make a fundamental change the amendment should have been such as to give me perfect notice as to what was intended. There is nothing in the amendment to suggest that the honourable Member wants to alter the provisions of articles 253 and 255. It may be an after thought but I cannot deal with after thoughts ; I have to deal with the amendment as it is tabled. Therefore, as I read the amendment, my construction is very natural.