As regards raising of general excise limit from 1 per cent to 2 per cent, I would like to say that it is a very harsh decision. It is an easy mechanism that we have resorted to. I think it is a mistake. In future any Finance Minister whenever he is in difficulty will make an increase of 1 per cent and get a sizeable amount of money. WE should make it a point not to make use of it. You should not have raised it from 1 per cent to 2 per cent. It was perhaps a mistake to have it even 1 per cent. It is not good for industrial production and expansion of economy.

I am glad that you have made certain changes in respect of powerlooms and handlooms. When I made my first comment on the present budget -I had said that under the name of giving certain concessions, most of the concessions under rationalisation were given to composite mills. But now it is somewhat corrected. We should follow one principle, namely, in all the sectors of textile industry handlooms must have first priority. We must bear one thing in mind that the composite mills must not come in the way of competitiveness of the handloom and power loom industry. I am glad you have given thought to it but please make it a more special point to see that if any further efforts are necessary the same will be adopted.

Now, I would like to say a few words about the allowances for rural development to the private companies. We do not want to oppose it. But I would like to point it out to you, to see to it, that it does not become another source of loophole. At the present moment we are not opposing it because you want to do something for rural development. Let us see what is it likely to lead to but, I am afraid, it is likely to be another source of loophole. So is the case with the charitable trusts where you have raised the limit from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 5 lakhs.

This time we have decided not to oppose this also but I would like to warn you that this also must not become a source of loophole. It looks simple, beneficial and insignificant source of tax evasion. So, one has take care of all these matters.

Then, Sir, you have given certain concession to the areas which are beyond a certain limit from urban centres. You have re-defined the rural area. Instead of 8 kilometres now it is 15 kilometres. I know it is difficult to define anything, and more so, rural areas. Here I would like to tell you that most of the advantages will be taken by the industrialists in the metropolitan areas to bring about these industries in the periphery of the metropolitan cities. May I tell you from my experience of Bombay that all these definitions can be very easily evaded. Therefore, be careful. No doubt, it is a good idea. May I say that by mere definitions these industries are not likely to come up in the rural areas unless Government undertakes some special steps, that, unless Government wants to make its own investment through Budget, if necessary. There is another point. My friend, Mr. Biju Patnaik, in his speech, has said that in the case of public sector, we do not want to depend upon the budgetary provisions. I understand his point. He wants the public sector to become commercially profitable more efficient. I agree. But do not put any restriction that you will not make any provision for the public sector in budgeting. All concessions through budget to the private sector are given and only the public sector is asked to be on discipline. Please do not discriminate against the public sector.

Secondly, the public sector must be efficient and must be commercially via I entirely agree with him. But if it has to occupy a high position, it has to be modern in its technique and management. I have no doubt about it. But must see that the public sector’s importance in the Indian economy which, a long years of efforts, has been established is not disturbed, is not allowed be eroded. If you do that then possibly, we can make further progress.

Sir, I have done.