People will remember a Government only when it brings about changes which leave a long-term impact on public life
Recently, a video of Union Minister Nitin Gadkari surfaced on social media in which he was seen criticising the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) officials for inordinate delays in project execution. Things have come to such a pass that people who supported the NDA Government in the past are also raising dissenting voices over efficiency issues. Infrastructure development is the key to economic development and the Government, too, has acknowledged this fact in various statements. However, as per a recent report issued by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MOSPI), the cost overrun in delayed projects is over `4.29 lakh crore (20.85 per cent of the original cost). Cost overruns are not only a colossal waste of public money, they also result in potential opportunity cost for all stakeholders in the form of delayed availability of assets for public use. To put things in perspective, as on December 2013, one-third of the infrastructure projects of PSUs were delayed and cost overruns were 19.7 per cent of the original budget. It is the same under the NDA Government and most of these projects were delayed due to the time taken in getting regulatory approvals. Even the Government is aware of the problem and a June 2019 report by KPMG highlights all these issues and remedial measures which are largely related to project management. India’s “Ease of Doing Business” ranking is improving consistently but at the same time Government undertakings are struggling to get necessary approvals for implementation of projects.
It is necessary to set quantifiable and measurable goals to evaluate the performance of any individual or department. The Government prepares the “Output Outcome Framework Report”, which is part of the Budget document but it is not discussed in detail in the media and the focus is always on tax rates, exemptions and so on. This report talks about financial outlays on various schemes and their expected outputs/outcomes. This document includes the phrase, “targets not amenable,” at various places, which means that people preparing the Budget were not sure what they wanted to achieve out of the expenditure. Governments across the world are facing an unprecedented revenue crisis and, therefore, it is necessary to take a look at the measures taken by the Centre in this direction. In the previous year, the Government introduced the “Sabka Vishwas” scheme to settle indirect tax cases and boost falling revenues. As per the Finance Ministry, approximately `3.6 lakh crore was locked up in disputes and the Government received applications worth approximately `89,800 crore under the said scheme. Though the Government claimed to realise `39,000 crore from the scheme, it actually received only about `15,000 crore because the rest of the amount was already pre-deposited by assessee. In a nutshell, this scheme was not a success despite desperate calls made by the Government to prevent its failure.
This year the Government introduced the “Vivad se Vishwas Scheme” to unclog the courts and realise the Income Tax revenue locked in litigation. As per Annexure 5 of the Receipt Budget of 2020, `8.02 lakh crore of Income Tax demand was under dispute as on March 31, 2019. As per a statement given in Parliament by the Minister of State for Finance, Anurag Thakur, the Government was able to realise merely `9,538 crore till September 8. This is despite the fact that the CBDT Chairman had specifically instructed the officials to close all the declarations filed in this scheme within the stipulated period. He set August 31 as the upper time limit for closing all the matters.
Given the current status, this well-intended scheme is also bound to fail because of the indifferent attitude of tax officials. The intent of the scheme was to achieve the twin objectives of tax collection as well as litigation minimisation, but it appears that none of them are going to be achieved. Just to cite an example, declarations filed by the assessee are not considered valid even if the Income Tax Department is at fault in matters relating to service of documents to the assessee. S/he is statutorily eligible to avail the benefit of the scheme. If things are not moving even after giving representation to higher authorities, including the Revenue Secretary and the CBDT Chairman, then it is easy to guess the level of effort required to correct the mess which we are in. The citizens will not get benefit from a noble intention unless that is implemented in the true spirit by our bureaucracy.
The ruling party should consider the fact that winning an election with the help of social engineering is one thing but bringing capable administrators into the Government is altogether different. People will remember a Government only when it brings changes which create a long-term impact.
(The writer is a Chartered Accountant)