The world we have lived in has changed and changed decisively. The sceptics and the naysayers would find it difficult to believe that the very earth on which we stand has either shifted or is shifting. We can either credit it, or assign the blame for it, to that undefinable concept called artificial intelligence! What Artificial Intelligence (AI) can do or what it cannot, is today a hot topic of discussion. Here is one more from this genre in digital forensics as reported in the Times of India recently from Hyderabad. It makes not only interesting reading but also warns us of how AI in the hands of the authorities becomes such a powerful weapon. Read on. A taxpayer sold an immovable property for ₹1.40 Crores. In his Returns he drastically reduced his liability to tax under capital gains by claiming deduction under the guise of ‘cost of improvement with indexation’ in addition to an indexed acquisition cost of ₹73 lakhs. Consequently, the long term capital gain arrived at, came to a mere ₹24,774/-. He had also claimed the cost of improvements spanning over financial years 2002-03 to 2007-08. This resulted in an indexed cost of ₹68.70 lakhs. In order to substantiate this cost, the assessee submitted photocopies of expenditure bills dated between 2002 and 2008. Little did the assessee know what could follow. One bill dated 6th July 2002 raised the red flag and attracted the attention of the authorities. The font used in the text of the bill was ‘Calibri (body)’. Investigations revealed that the font was designed between 2002 and 2004 and released to the public only in 2006, becoming the default font in 2007. How could the assessee get a bill in that font printed in Calibri when the font itself was non-existent when the bill was prepared! To cut a long story short, the assessee had to file a revised Return excluding the cost of improvements and had to pay tax based on revised and duly computed capital gains! The authorities got to the bottom of this matter using AI!
Tata Consultancy Services offered pink slips to about 2% of its global workforce. This is not merely an ordinary newsworthy development mainly for two reasons – one, it is happening in a Tata organisation and secondly, it is in the IT sector that is in the vanguard of new India. This development signals a transformational moment not just for the company, but for the entire Indian IT sector. Contrary to popular belief, the layoffs are not primarily driven by AI replacing jobs. TCS CEO K. Krithivasan cited persistent skill mismatches and deployment inefficiencies as the core issue. The retrenchment disproportionately affects employees with over ten years of experience, reflecting a shift away from legacy roles towards agile, tech-first teams. With clients pushing for cost reductions, IT firms are restructuring to remain competitive. TCS is probably pivoting towards hiring younger talent with AI and cloud-native skills to reduce costs and increase adaptability. The layoffs reflect a strategic reorientation towards AI-driven service delivery, cloud computing and advanced analytics. Despite reskilling efforts on the part of the employers many of them have struggled to make the transition, highlighting the urgency for continuous learning in tech roles. TCS, long seen as a stable employer, taking this step makes layoffs more “acceptable” across the sector. Other firms like HCLTech are following suit. Predictably employee unions have called the move potentially illegal, demanding fair compensation and support which could eventually lead to even a regulatory scrutiny. While some analysts see this as a necessary strategic overhaul, others warn of execution risks and morale issues. In the end, it appears obvious that strategic recalibration is afoot in the industry and the TCS move may be the beginning of a trend, a shift away from legacy IT models to digital-first paradigms and also the growing importance of adaptability and tech fluency. It is obvious that the IT industry is pivoting towards a leaner, and more agile operation – not as a trend but as a necessity.
Nations around the world would soon start appointing officials specialised in the art of dealing with Donald Trump. In matters of world affairs, the most talented people are normally those with a flair for diplomacy. That requirement is all set to be replaced by the thickness of their skin. This is the prime requirement for anyone dealing with Trump. The requirements for a world leader is all set to change whether you like it or not. Statesmanship used to be the cardinal requirement so far. No more. India is at crossroads. President Donald Trump’s announcement of a 25% tariff on all Indian goods, effective 1st August 2025 has jolted the bilateral trade relations and reignited concerns about Trump’s transactional and combative approach to diplomacy. From an Indian perspective, this move is more than a trade barrier – it is a geopolitical signal wrapped in economic aggression. He declared India would pay a 25% tariff plus an unspecified penalty, linking trade policy to India’s strategic autonomy – a rare conflation of defence, energy, and commerce. The American President appears to have crossed a few redlines already. Trump has raised Brazil’s tariff rate to a whopping 50% – potentially launching a trade war with Latin America’s biggest economy, which sells large amounts of beef, coffee, steel and other products to the United States. That is not all. Trump’s logic for sky high tariff for Brazil is that the country deserved this high tariff as a punitive measure for treating its former President Jair Bolsonaro. Strange but true! Where does the American President get the authority to punish another country for how it treats its former President? Till the other day, the Indian economy was great for Trump. Today according to Trump, the Indian and Russian economies are “dead” economies. Come on Mr President, whether the economy is dead or alive, who gives you the right to pass judgments on other economies? There is this saying in English – “Bull in a China Shop”. It is an idiom used to describe someone who is clumsy, awkward or reckless, especially in a situation requiring care and delicacy. It implies a lack of awareness or sensitivity to the environment and the potential for causing damage. Can the US survive the current chaotic presidency? Even if it does, who would be left to pick up the pieces? In the nursery rhyme that we have learnt in schools starts with “ring-a-ring-a-roses” and ends with the words “all fall down”. No winners! Trump’s tariff salvo is a reminder that economic diplomacy under his leadership is laced with vitriol and volatility. For India, the challenge lies in defending its strategic choices while navigating a turbulent landscape. The episode underscores the need for resilient export strategies, diversified markets, and a calibrated response that balances pragmatism with principle.
Some more on Trump. Trump is a deeply aggrieved person. His imbecile brain tells him that he had been deliberately wronged by the system. Now, after being restored to the throne, he only has one aim – revenge. See how well he is doing it. He has practically cleaned up the system that he calls the ‘deep state’. Justifying or rationalising Donald Trump’s use of tariff threats to settle what appear to be settling personal scores with world leaders is a deeply controversial endeavour. But it can be unpacked through several lenses: strategic ambiguity, populist politics, and executive power. While critics argue that it is reckless and vindictive, supporters frame it as disruptive diplomacy with a noble purpose. Trump’s worldview is famously transactional; allies and adversaries alike are judged by what they “give” the U.S. Tariffs become a tool of reward or punishment depending on how leaders align with his interests – both geopolitical and personal. Trump’s tariff threats often coincide with public statements targeting specific leaders, such as Modi or Lula, and are amplified through platforms like Truth Social. This creates a spectacle of strength, reinforcing his image as a leader who doesn’t back down, come what may, even if the economic rationale behind them is thin. India, despite Modi’s overtures, was hit with a 25% tariff and an additional penalty for its trade with Russia, prompting criticism that Trump was retaliating against Modi’s perceived closeness to Putin. Trump frequently delays or revises tariff deadlines injecting uncertainty into global markets and forcing countries to negotiate under pressure. This ambiguity allows him to extract concessions or signal displeasure without committing to any long-term policy. Mexico, for example, received a 90-day reprieve after a last-minute call with its president despite Trump’s earlier insistence on no extensions. Trump has invoked emergency powers under laws like the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, allowing him to bypass the Congress and impose tariffs unilaterally. This legal manoeuvring gives him broad discretions which critics say enable personal vendettas to masquerade as national policies. He does not care if using tariffs to settle scores erodes trust in global institutions like the WTO. Countries like Canada, India, and Brazil have expressed frustrations over being penalised despite existing strategic partnerships with them. Tariffs tied to political motives risk inflation, supply chain disruptions and retaliatory measures. Trump’s tariff threats are a form of economic statecraft – designed to compel alignment with U.S. interests, reward loyalty and punish defiance. In a world where diplomacy is slow and opaque, tariffs offer a blunt but effective tool to reshape global behaviour. But that is purely a utilitarian view. The deeper question should be whether such tactics serve the long-term U.S. interests or are merely short-term optics of power. One day soon, we will know.
In the last issue of Bizsol Update I had a chance to dwell deep into the JSW – Bhushan Steel imbroglio. The legal fraternity in particular were at a loss on what could be done, if at all. Here comes the news that the Supreme Court has decided to recall its previous judgment! The apex Court’s decision to recall its May 2, 2025, judgment ordering the liquidation of Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd (BPSL) marks a pivotal moment in India’s insolvency jurisprudence. It’s not merely a legal reversal. It is a reflection on the evolving balance between procedural sanctity and economic realism. The original judgment, authored by Justice Bela Trivedi (now retired) had castigated JSW Steel’s ₹19,700 crore resolution plan as being in “flagrant violation” of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). It faulted the Resolution Professional and the Committee of Creditors (CoC) for procedural lapses and invoked Article 142 of the Constitution to direct the company’s liquidation. But on July 31, a Special Bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai recalled that verdict citing misinterpretation of legal precedents, overlooking factual nuances and disproportionate consequences for stakeholders. The court will now hear the matter afresh keeping all arguments open. This case exposes a tension central to insolvency law – should technical violations override commercial outcomes? Though delayed, it paved the way to revive a company with ₹28,000 crore turnover and 25,000 employees. The earlier ruling arguably overstepped by second-guessing CoC’s commercial wisdom – a domain courts have traditionally respected. Article 142 grants the Supreme Court the power to pass any order necessary to ensure “complete justice” in any matter pending before it. This provision allows the Court to go beyond a strict application of the law to achieve a fair and just outcome even if it means filling legislative gaps or overriding existing laws in specific cases. This recall is not just about JSW or BPSL – it is about the very credibility of India’s insolvency ecosystem. Reversals after multiyear executions send mixed signals to global investors. The Supreme Court’s willingness to revisit its own judgment reflects intellectual humility at one level and institutional maturity at another at the cost of certainty of its own decisions. It acknowledges that justice is not just about legal purity, it is also about economic pragmatism and its human impact. In a country where insolvency resolution is yet to find its feet, this case could become a landmark – not for its controversy, but for its correction.
An obituary reference for a communist looks a bit odd in a business bulletin. Be that as it may, not making a reference to this comrade who dominated the left wing of the political spectrum would not only be unfair but also unethical in one sense. Here it goes. Velikkakathu Sankaran Achuthanandan, fondly known as Comrade VS, passed away on 21st July 2025 at the ripe old age of 101 leaving behind an indelible legacy etched into the political and social fabric of Kerala. A towering figure in the Indian communist politics, he was the last surviving founding member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and served as the Chief Minister of Kerala from 2006 to 2011. You can agree with VS or oppose him, but you cannot ignore him. You may call him a plebian or proletariat as per your wish, but he was a quintessential comrade who stayed next door. In an evolving society with constantly changing value systems, he became an anathema in a world fast becoming poorer in ideological convictions. That is another matter. In pursuit of what he believed to be correct, he could even have taken his Party backwards in time. VS, as he was known, was revered as the “eye and heart” of Kerala’s left movement, a symbol of integrity and resilience. He remained a card-holding communist until his last day, making him the world’s longest-serving active member of the movement. His mortal remains were honoured with full state rites and thousands paid tribute to the man who never stopped fighting for the people. Comrade VS Achuthanandan’s life was not just a chapter in history – it was a manifesto of hope for the state and never ending fight for survival (and also relevance) during his lifetime. A prayer to God for his soul might offend him, for he was an atheist. Here is wishing his soul peace and tranquillity that it richly deserves after his long principled struggle on this earth.
Thank you.
Venkat R Venkitachalam
