Hindutva Watch account withheld by X following legal demand from Indian govt
New Delhi: The account of the independent research initiative “Hindutva Watch in India '' has been withheld by social media platform X “in response to a legal demand” from the Union government. The action was taken on the evening of Tuesday, January 16. The organisation’s founder Raqib Hameed Naik said that they received a notification of the same from X three hours after the account was withheld.
The email from X read, “In the interest of transparency, we are writing to inform you that X has received a legal removal demand from the Government of India regarding your X account, @HindutvaWatchIn, that claims the following content violates India's Information Technology Act, 2000.”
🚨 Update from Hindutva Watch
— Raqib Hameed Naik (@raqib_naik) January 16, 2024
Today, our @X account was withheld in India following a legal demand from the Government of India.
Three hours after the withholding of our account, we received an email from X notifying us of this action. pic.twitter.com/YPAwBl1QdP
Reacting to the action, Raqib Hameed said, “While shocking, it's not surprising, considering Prime Minister Modi regime's history of suppressing free press & critical voices. This won't deter us! We remain committed! The suppression of our account in India only fuels our determination to continue our work undeterred. (sic)”
Hindutva Watch monitors “reports of attacks on members of minority and marginalised communities for their faith by the radicalised Hindus and the Hindutva militia groups in India” with the aim of exposing “ideology, institutions and people responsible for acts of violence and injustice”.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
PIL in SC seeks abolition of TDS system, cites constitutional violations
New Delhi (PTI): A PIL filed in the Supreme Court on Thursday sought to scrap the TDS system calling it "arbitrary and irrational" and violative of various fundamental rights, including equality.
The PIL challenged the tax deducted at source or TDS framework under the Income Tax Act, which mandates the deduction of tax at the time of payment by the payer and its deposit with the income tax department. The deducted amount is adjusted against the payee's tax liability.
The plea filed by lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay through advocate Ashwani Dubey, made the Centre, ministry of law and justice, law commission, and NITI Aayog as parties.
It sought a direction to "declare the TDS system manifestly arbitrary, irrational and against Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (right to practice profession) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution, hence void and inoperative".
The plea further sought directions to the NITI Ayog to consider contentions raised in the plea and suggest necessary changes in TDS system.
It said the law commission should examine the legality of the TDS system and prepare a report within three months.
The TDS system imposes significant administrative and financial burdens on taxpayers tasked with compliance which include managing complex rules, issuing TDS certificates, filing returns, and defending against penalties for inadvertent errors, argued the plea.
Assessees often incur substantial expenses, ranging from salaries of compliance staff to professional fees for tax consultants, without receiving compensation, it said.
The plea said the system violated Article 14 (equality before the law) by disproportionately burdening economically weaker sections and small earners who lack the capacity to navigate its technical requirements.
Referring to Article 23, it said the imposition of tax collection duties on private citizens amounted to forced labour.
The TDS system was stated to adversely affect individuals below the taxable income threshold, as tax was deducted at source irrespective of their liability.
"The regulatory and procedural framework surrounding TDS is excessively technical, often requiring specialised legal and financial expertise, which most assessees lack. The result is an unjust shifting of sovereign responsibilities from the government to private citizens without adequate compensation, resources, or legal safeguards," it said.
