More of the same

Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala has just reshuffled his cabinet and it looks like more of the same. Though long awaited, this move is not expected to help put the Nepali Congress party back on track, such as was the obvious intention. That objective was to have been attained at the party general convention in Pokhara itself. But the party that likes to consider itself synonymous with democracy came out of that conclave more firmly in Koirala’s grip than before. There is little doubt now that Koirala is indeed the strongman of the Nepali Congress. Where does that leave the party and the democratic process in this country? This cabinet reshuffle provides one indicator. The prime minister and party president set out to heal differences in the party by including in his new cabinet a strong representation from the rebel camp. But there have been few takers.

Khum Bahadur Khadka, one of the rebel camp heavy weights, has refused to take oath of office as the new Minister for Works and Physical Planning. Palten Gurung, another ministerial nominee who tried to opt out was only persuaded to change his mind after Koirala called on him personally at his house. Finance minister nominee Ram Sharan Mahat also stayed away from the oath taking ceremony, and two excuses have been preferred. His family says he was indisposed, but the bearded economist himself said that he was acting out of his belief that there should be continuity at the finance ministry, not sudden change. Interestingly, this consideration never seems to have bothered him in the past. Another anti-Koirala stalwart, Chiranjivi Wagle, accuses the party president of ignoring calls to first nominate all remaining members of the party Central Working Committee before going in for a cabinet reshuffle. The prime minister has also failed to take Krishna Prasad Bhattarai along with him in the interest of party unity. That autocratic touch is nothing new. Bhattarai is reported to have advised getting the winter session of parliament out of the way first. Whatever the reason cited, the fact remains that the patch up of differences that the party managed in Pokhara is coming unstuck already.

In other ways, too, the new cabinet is old wine in a new bottle. To take the numbers first, at thirty-seven strong, the cabinet that has just seen the light of day is a far cry from calls for a slimming down of officialdom which had led to a reduction in cabinet membership to twenty-one. Gone is any pretence at adherence to the perfectly sound idea of keeping cabinet strength down to no more than about 10 percent of the total membership of parliament if not of the house of representatives. The political expediency of handing out as many ministerial berths as possible in return for political loyalty has clearly taken precedence again. Secondly, some of the old tainted faces have resurfaced, signalling that it’s business as usual. Prominent among them is Govinda Raj Joshi who gets the local development portfolio. Also resurfaced is Mohammad Aftab Alam, as a minister of state, after his exit in the wake of allegations about unsavoury involvement in an abduction case. No sooner has the new cabinet been put together than people are already beginning to wonder how long it is going to last, and how long till the next reshuffle.

Nepalese income tax appeal system

By Rup Khadka

If a taxpayer is not satisfied with the amount assessed by a tax officer he may appeal against the assessment order. Under the 1960 and 1963 income tax laws, any objection against assessment had to be lodged with the local Bada Hakim or Magistrate within 35 days of the date of receipt of such order. The Bada Hakim or Magistrate had to decide the appeals within 60 days (no such time limit was stipulated in the 1960 law) of the lodging of the appeal. A taxpayer who is not satisfied with the decision of the Bada Hakim or Magistrate concerned had recourse to the Revenue and Tax Court within 35 days of the receipt of notice from the Bada Hakim.

Under the 1974 income tax law, a taxpayer can lodge an objection against assessment with the Revenue Tribunal or the Director General within 35 days of receipt of the assessment order. If a taxpayer cannot file a petition against the assessment order within the specified time for genuine reasons he can file an application with the Director General within 35 days for an extension, and if the Director General is satisfied he may extend the time limit by up to 30 days.

Appeals are filed before the revenue tribunal against an assessment or penalty imposed by an assessing authority. Under the revenue tribunal Act a taxpayer is required to pay 50 percent of the assessed tax and the amount of penalty or both (when an appeal is filed against both an assessment and a penalty) as directed by the assessing authority before filing the appeal before the Revenue Tribunal. A taxpayer is required to deposit only one third of the outstanding income tax when he files an application with the Director General.

Provision relating to payment or deposit is necessary to keep down the number of appeals. This system reduces the urge to appeal on the part of taxpayers who wish to appeal for no other reason but postponement of tax payment, thereby causing inordinate delay in the collection of revenue.

The appeal system has not been working properly. It takes even a decade to settle appeals filed with the Revenue Tribunal. An appeal to the Director General is likely to be biased in favour of the tax officials. Tax department officials are both prosecutors and judges.

No statutory time limit has been imposed for the finalization of cases filed before the Revenue Tribunal or Director General. Hence those who appeal have to preserve their records for an inordinate time, which results in inconvenience and costs.

It is necessary to establish an appeal system that is independent and impartial. At the same time there must be specific rules and time requirements to protect the revenue. The appeal must be based on production of appropriate books and records and be preceded by settlement of undisputed taxes and deposit of a part of the taxes in dispute.

The appeal system will change under the draft Income Tax Act 2001. This law proposes two types of appeal. First to the tax administration for an administrative review which may be conducted the following decisions:

A personal ruling issued by the Department, an estimate by the tax office or a decision to make an estimate of a person’s estimated tax payable; a decision by the tax office to require a person to file a return of income; a decision by the Department on an application by a person to extend the due date by which the person must file a return; an assessment of income tax payable by a person or interest and penalties payable by a person; notification by the Department of an amount to be set aside by a person as a receiver; a decision by the Department to require a person to pay monies owing to a tax debtor to the Department; a decision by the Department to require a person to pay tax on behalf of a non-resident person; a decision by the Department on an application by a person for a refund of tax; and a decision by the Department on an application by a person for an extension of time within which to file an objection.

If a taxpayer does not agree with a reviewable decision made by a tax officer he may file in writing an objection to the decision with the Department within 30 days after the decision is made specifying in detail the grounds upon which it is made. If a taxpayer cannot file such an objection within this time, he can make an application for extension of time. In such cases, the Department may, where reasonable cause is shown, extend for a period not exceeding 30 days the date by which an objection must be filed and shall serve the person with written notice of the Department’s decision on the application.

After consideration of a person’s objection filed, the Department may allow or disallow the objection in whole or part; and shall serve the person with written notice of the decision on an objection.

Where the Department fails to serve a person with notice of the decision on an objection within 90 days of an objection being filed, the person may, by notice in writing filed with the Department, treat the Department as having made a decision to disallow the objection. A person shall be required to notify the Department in writing of the matter of having treated the objection as disallowed. The Department shall be treated as having disallowed the objection and served the person with notice to that effect on the day that the notification is filed with the Department.

A taxpayer who is aggrieved by a decision on an objection may appeal to the Revenue Tribunal in accordance with the Revenue Tribunal Act, 1974. The appellant shall file a copy of the notice of appeal with the Department within 15 days of doing so.

The draft Income Tax Act 2001 has introduced the concept of administrative review, which will allow the tax administration to correct mistakes, made by the tax administrators internally. Since the Tax Department is required to give its decision within 90 days of the submission of objection, taxpayers also may benefit from the speedy decision on their objections. If the Department does not give its decision within 90 days, taxpayers can appeal to the Revenue Tribunal. In this way, both tax administration and taxpayers may benefit from the new appeal system.

Whose cup of tea ?

By Sugam Nepal

On a chilly morning of December, I woke up to the chirrup of birds and a pleasant zephyr, overwhelmed by a thought to do something conspicuous and creative. In my mind many fresh ideas lingered and I was in such a great mood that if someone had asked me to go bungee jumping I would have instantaneously agree to give it a try (though I am very afraid of heights). Gasping frigid air and blowing warm soft circles of wintry smoke through my rattling teeth and quivering lips, I was striding towards my college. It was exactly in Naya Baneshwor that I happened to lay my eyes on a huge pile of fetid garbage on the street. I stood there and gazed at it for a few seconds but I could do nothing more than slink off looking daggers at it for shattering my mood. All my billowy desires and enthusiasm went in vein. I, then, came down to earth surrounded by reality and overflowing with disappointment and discouragement at seeing such an unpleasant sight in the early morning. I then realized that sometimes small-small things, which we notice but tend to overlook in our daily life, could act as an obstruction when we proceed to endeavour untiringly in little spheres of work and progress. On that day I felt as if that stench and dirt scattered all over the street was jeering at me challenging my civic responsibility.

I have always heard my father say "a healthy environment is an abode of God" and to me it proved to be true because as soon as my eyes ran over the unshaped mass, my exasperated desire to excel was jeopardised.

I could not help mumbling to myself, complaining about the present scenario of anarchy and murky politics upon such a fundamental issue, which is directly related to public health. I questioned to myself "was my Kathmandu always like this?" scattered with plastic bags and rotten food thrown recklessly on the street, which drew the attention of each individual passing by. Then why are those so called delegates not being challenged as I am when I pass by any street or alley which collects some amount of garbage at its corner?

The ones who can bring about change are being blind-folded. No matter how much we are loosing due to the retrenchment of tourism, the concerned authorities are mum. They are busy making a hue and cry over a simple matter but they don’t bother when it comes to the health of an individual or individuals, which all of us acknowledge as being the most essential aspect. They are engaged in precepts, speeches, preaching and teaching values, but what about cudgelling their brains over such issues which involve the most basic necessity of a person, that is to be healthy and live in a suave environment. If this is so, why are they sitting back waiting for miracles to happen rather than finding alternatives.

However, my words will merely remain on this piece of paper and my insight will show a negligible effect on those who promulgate themselves as purveyors. They read such bits and throw them into the dustbin, which I guess by now has overflowed with litter that ultimately will end up in that street at Naya Baneshwor or wheresoever. But this picture never holds up a mirror to them who succeed to hold the reins of government. They are busy passing the buck to each other, lamenting and uttering within their inner self ,"whose cup of tea is it anyway?"

Thinking about regional peace

By Pratyoush Onta

Last week peace activists from India and Pakistan visited Kathmandu. Admiral L Ramdas (former head of the Indian navy) and Sandeep Pandey from India and A H Nayyar and Zia Mian from Pakistan made compelling presentations at several forums including Martin Chautari and Baggikhana (latter under the auspices of Himal Association). They addressed a whole host of arguments usually marshalled by pro-nuclear defence hawks in both Pakistan and India (and their apologists in Nepal and elsewhere). Among other points, they argued that nuclear bombs did not deter India and Pakistan from fighting a war in Kargil in 1999. Nor have they forced any reductions in the buildup of conventional weapons in those two countries.

Even if the current tensions between India and Pakistan were to be resolved, they added, the danger of accidents related to nuclear weapons meant that the entire existence of the Subcontinent (and by extension other parts of the world as we know it) was in jeopardy.

Hence the movement against nuclear weapons in South Asia must be given a firm footing immediately. In a recent issue of Frontline, Ramdas has stated that now that India and Pakistan both have nuclear weapons, "a nuclear protocol and some kind of safeguards can be discussed in some detail with some form of international supervision and control." In that interview he has also added that since some regional strategists also perceive a nuclear threat from China, some kind of nuclear protocol with it is also important.

How can the peace movement in South Asia force the governments of India and Pakistan and possibly China to agree to work on such a protocol? What is the way to build a peace movement in South Asia? Admiral Ramdas who is also the chairperson of the Indian chapter of the Pakistan-India Peoples Forum for Peace and Democracy told the audience in Martin Chautari that the way forward was to build a regional peace movement. No doubt, this is a slow process but he cited examples from Pakistan and India to suggest that it could be done. Indeed in both countries the movement has grown from the work of a handful of people confronting the entrenched pro-nuclear stance of the political and military establishment to a bi-national network that now encompasses local to national pro-peace activities. In the early 1990s, a few people in both countries met locally to discuss how protest movements against nuclear weapons could be organized. Subsequent to these meetings they worked toward holding national conventions of anti-nuclear activists in both countries. Such conventions, it was pointed out, succeeded in giving shape to national peace movements in both India and Pakistan. Close interactions between these two movements, Ramdas added, had already produced a visible level of activities and credibility. Visa bureaucrats in the two countries, known to spoil the plans of many participants in bi-national and regional meets, do not dare to deny peace activists visas, he added.

How can the peace movement in India and Pakistan develop into a regional peace movement that would effectively tame the future nuclear ambitions of India and Pakistan? Having visited Sri Lanka and Bangladesh before coming to Nepal, the activists shared some ideas on how this could be done. Zia Mian, a physicist turned peace activist, proposed that the other countries of the region – namely Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and Maldives – should first declare themselves nuclear free individually. In so doing, they will be stating their moral resolve to never engage in programs that would produce, store, and use nuclear weapons or their constituting parts. In fact, Bangladesh has already made such a declaration officially.

After this was done, in the second step, these five countries could work toward declaring the entire South Asian region as a nuclear free zone. Citing examples from Africa and South America, Mian suggested that at that juncture of the peace movement, enough moral pressure could be brought to bear upon India and Pakistan to totally scrap their nuclear weapons. This is an achievable goal of the peace movement, he added. It was also suggested that this route of the peace movement had a better chance of securing peace in the region than the imposition of international sanctions.

However, they did not have much to say about how the peace movements in the other countries could be launched in terms of the objectives they had described. When members of the audience pointed out that there were many other concerns demanding the attention of activists in the other five countries, Mian pointed out that in a context of total nuclear annihilation, there would be no society left in the Subcontinent for any other politics to be possible. In the true style of an activist, he therefore suggested that the anti-nuclear movement was the mother of all social movements! Ramdas added that activists in each of the non-nuclear countries in the region will have to get their act together soon to form national peace movements. He pointed out that activists from Pakistan and India could be of some help in that process.

All this was fine but I kept wishing that they would address some of the known difficulties of building a regional movement on any given theme in South Asia. Who gets to represent the individual countries in such efforts? How are they selected and to whom are they accountable? What are the sources of funding to support such work? How do you generate interest in the anti-nuclear movement in the other countries of the region when they were totally obsessed with other topics? For instance, our most influential print media was too obsessed with the actor Thinley and of course the activities of the Maobadis to take a substantial notice of the visit of these peace activists to Kathmandu. These questions deserve reflection by all those who are concerned with the future prosperity and peace of the entire South Asian region.