Beyond Kartavya: Union Budget 2026 And The Legal Quietude

The Union Budget is no longer a neutral fiscal statement confined to revenue and expenditure. It has become a central instrument through which governance priorities are asserted, social choices are structured, and constitutional values are indirectly shaped. Union Budget 2026-27 must therefore be read not merely as an economic exercise, but as a document of constitutional consequence. Its language, silences and emphases reveal how fiscal authority is exercised, how accountability is framed and how democratic scrutiny is managed. Against this backdrop, the Budget warrants examination not for what it promises, but for how power is organised, justified and insulated through fiscal design.Kartavya as Rhetoric, Not ResponsibilityUnion Budget 2026-27 is delivered in the idiom of kartavya—duty to growth, duty to aspiration, duty to inclusion. The choice of language is neither accidental nor neutral. It appeals to discipline, patience and collective endurance. What it carefully avoids is responsibility that can be measured, enforced or questioned. Budgets are not moral manifestos. They are exercises of State power. In constitutional terms, their legitimacy is tested not by narrative coherence but by adherence to principles of fiscal accountability, democratic oversight and distributive justice. When the language of duty is deployed without corresponding enforceable obligation, it operates not as governance, but as cover. Over the last several years, the Union Budget has steadily drifted from being a forum of parliamentary contestation into an exercise in presentation. Union Budget 2026 continues this trajectory—treating economic policy as inevitability rather than choice and fiscal outcomes as technical necessity rather than political decision.The Economic Survey: Growth Without Social AccountingThe Economic Survey preceding the Budget projects confidence—7.4 per cent GDP growth, moderated inflation, improved tax buoyancy and banking sector resilience. On paper, the macroeconomic story appears stable. What remains conspicuously under-analysed is distribution. Employment quality, wage stagnation, informal sector vulnerability and household indebtedness receive limited attention. Participation rates are highlighted, but job security is ignored. Consumption recovery is inferred, even as real purchasing power continues to erode. Fiscal consolidation is celebrated, while its social consequences are left unexplored. The Survey functions less as a diagnostic tool and more as a pre-emptive justification, framing fiscal choices as unavoidable outcomes of economic logic rather than political priorities open to challenge.Fiscal Federalism and the Recalibration of Financial PowerIndia's constitutional architecture never envisioned fiscal symmetry between the Union and the states. The Centre was granted superior taxing authority, while the states were entrusted with substantial expenditure responsibilities, an imbalance intended to be moderated through institutional correctives such as the Finance Commission and by a political commitment to cooperative federalism. Fiscal capacity, after all, is the lifeblood of autonomy. Without meaningful control over resources, federalism risks becoming administrative rather than constitutional. Union Budget 2026 does not openly announce a restructuring of this balance. Yet a quieter recalibration appears to be underway. The growing reliance on cesses and surcharges — revenues that fall outside the divisible pool — narrows the share automatically transferred to states through formula-based mechanisms. Conditional transfers and centrally sponsored schemes increasingly tie financial flows to Union-designed policy frameworks, blurring the line between coordination and direction. Control over financial flows is ultimately control over policy priorities. This evolution does not necessarily amount to constitutional impropriety; federations often centralise in response to economic complexity. But when revenue authority accumulates upward even as expenditure responsibilities remain widely dispersed, fiscal choice begins to contract. Federalism does not disappear — it is subtly reconfigured.GST and the Question of Tax SovereigntyThe Goods and Services Tax marked one of the most consequential fiscal reorganisations since Independence. By subsuming a wide range of indirect taxes, GST significantly altered the revenue autonomy of states. Recent proposals in the Finance Bill 2026 — including adjustments to intermediary service rules and broader indirect-tax rationalisation — further illustrate the Union's continuing role in standardising the national tax regime. The GST Council was envisioned as a forum of cooperative decision-making — a collaborative structure the Supreme Court acknowledged in Union of India v. Mohit Minerals. Yet the experience of compensation negotiations and revenue uncertainty has revealed the vulnerability that accompanies pooled sovereignty. When taxation authority is shared but...

Beyond Kartavya: Union Budget 2026 And The Legal Quietude

Syed Aqib Hussain

Tags