30 January 2015

The festivities, hopes and resolutions of the New Year’s eve were soon brought back to the real, as we entered 2015. January already bore the scars of fascism, between the duly observed anniversaries of the Holocaust Day and of Mahatma Gandhi’s murder. Two shocks from another time, another era, in fact, another millennium – yet, two legacies kept alive, as their threats, too, are always ready to inflame our everyday. As a poet almost said, “Good (de)fences make good neighbours”… This January 8th revealed how urgently the civil societies of our world must come up creatively with some means of responding to the apparent reign of terror. But to leave the ad hominem and to build beyond the immediate emotions, we must stop our romantic contemplations of the faces of fascism, to understand its structures. Beyond the unbearable mass of the dead, January 2015 could act as the igniting reminder of the eternal risks of socio-political impatience, of the tragedy of inter-cultural deafness, but especially, of the urgency to depart from the accusations and the finger-pointing to truly build an alternative. Thus, breaking away from our past and preparing a future transcending the tumorous growth of fascism, will require that we ambition to develop 2015 as a conscious yet innovative effort to respond to the destructive temptations that sprout around us, but also, often, from within. This week on LILA Inter-actions, Joe Keysor returns to the setting of the Nazi Holocaust, to discover the shallowness of our understanding of religions as the source of both our remaining belligerent reflexes, and our frail inspirations to answer constructively. Subhash Gatade reflects on the ideological twists that permit an assassin to become a saint, against the backdrop of a national and international context unable to bring the vitality for connections required today.

Debate

Hold the cursor on the illustrations to display animations.

An Urgent Recognition

Joe Keysor

Gandhi’s Assassins

Subhash Gatade

Requested file could not be found (error code 404). Verify the file URL specified in the shortcode.

Listen

Listen

Requested file could not be found (error code 404). Verify the file URL specified in the shortcode.

Keysor dtr-460-bw

The re­cent Charlie Hebdo mas­sacre in Paris is a bloody il­lus­tra­tion of the fact that there are those among us who be­lieve that they have li­cence to kill for the good of hu­man­ity. They do not con­sider them­selves as evil, but see their vic­tims as evil, obstacles to the at­tain­ment of a bet­ter world.

This is a vital as­pect of the spir­itual dis­ease of fas­cism, and shows it­self in in­di­vidual acts, as in the as­sas­sin­a­tion of Gandhi; in de­term­ined polit­ical and/or re­li­gious move­ments, such as ISIS or Al Qaeda; and at times even in the ac­tions of en­tire states and na­tions, such as Hitler’s Ger­many, Stalin’s Rus­sia, Mao’s China and Pol Pot’s Cam­bodia.

The use of ruth­less vi­ol­ence to re­make man­kind can­not be simplist­ic­ally labeled either sec­u­lar or re­li­gious. The athe­ist­ical Com­mun­ists used ‘human eman­cip­a­tion’, ‘peace’ and ‘justice’ to jus­tify their dis­astrous and in­hu­man policies, and the list of vi­ol­ent sec­u­lar or­gan­isa­tions is a long one: the Weather­men and the Black Pan­thers in the USA; the United Red Army in Japan; the FLQ in Canada; the Red Bri­gade in Italy; and the Baader-Mein­hof gang in Ger­many, to name only a few.

Re­li­gious mani­fest­a­tions such as the In­quis­i­tion and the Cru­sades are not cur­rently rel­ev­ant, and fas­cism does not have much of a foothold in the Chris­tian com­munity now – but the crim­inal ter­ror­ism of 9-11 and Is­lam­ist at­ro­cit­ies in Syria, Eng­land, France, India, Africa and in other parts of the world make it clear that killing in the name of God is an on­go­ing prob­lem. It is also an in­creas­ing prob­lem, and prom­ises to be­come worse.

Is the time of the Cru­sades com­pletely over?

In the Third Reich, we see an odd mix­ture of both sec­u­lar and re­li­gious im­pulses, a mix­ing of the worst of both ex­tremes, to cre­ate tech­no­lo­gic­ally ad­vanced and in­dus­tri­al­ised mass killing never be­fore seen in the his­tory of the world.

It is too easy to dis­miss in­di­vidual ter­ror­ists or state ter­ror­ist lead­ers and their ac­com­plices as crim­in­als and mad­men. They have co­her­ent goals, and be­lieve that vi­ol­ence and ter­ror­ism are ef­fect­ive means of achiev­ing those goals. Even someone as bizarre as Hitler had a sys­tem of eth­ics based on his un­der­stand­ing of life as re­lent­less struggle. His pe­cu­liar mix of philo­sophy, sci­ence and re­li­gion aimed at be­ne­fit­ing hu­man­ity by el­ev­at­ing the most fit to their right­ful place of dom­in­ance and by elim­in­at­ing the weak and the de­gen­er­ate.

Hitler’s ideo­logy did not sud­denly ma­ter­i­al­ise from nowhere. For more than a hun­dred years be­fore he was born in 1889, Europe’s lead­ing thinkers had been ar­guing that Chris­tian­ity was out of date, that there was no higher spir­itual rev­el­a­tion from bey­ond, and that human reason alone was the sole and ad­equate guide. The idea that the lives and deaths of in­di­vidu­als were not im­port­ant in the grand scheme of things can be found in the writ­ings of Kant, Hegel, Schopen­hauer, and other im­port­ant Ger­man thinkers.

quote fascism jk 1

The in­flu­ence of the churches in Ger­many and in Europe greatly de­clined in the nine­teenth cen­tury, and new ideas of the mean­ing and pur­pose of life arose to re­place in­creas­ingly out­dated re­li­gious tra­di­tions. Es­pe­cially im­port­ant was the in­flu­ence of what is now called ‘so­cial Dar­win­ism’ – the be­lief that Dar­winian evol­u­tion sup­plied the philo­soph­ical basis for a new human ethic. Life thus came to be un­der­stood by many as a re­lent­less struggle in which the pro­gress of all spe­cies, in­clud­ing the human spe­cies, was achieved by the sur­vival of the fit­test; that as a res­ult of this pro­cess the north­ern Europeans dom­in­ated the world by the nat­ural right of evol­u­tion­ary law.

In­teg­ral to Hitler’s world­view was hos­til­ity to Chris­tian­ity. The Jew­ish ori­gins of this re­li­gion were well-known, and fre­quently re­ferred to as being con­trary to an older and health­ier pre-Chris­tian Ger­man pa­gan­ism. Chris­tian­ity was openly as­so­ci­ated with the emer­gence of demo­cracy, in­ter­na­tion­al­ism, in­di­vidual liberty, and moral val­ues that the Nazis were de­term­ined to elim­in­ate. This view of the Jews hav­ing cor­rup­ted Europe cul­tur­ally, as agents of ra­cial and spir­itual decay, was a vital com­pon­ent of the Holo­caust, though often un­re­cog­nised today.

Yet, there were still many people in Ger­many with vary­ing de­grees of at­tach­ment to Chris­tian­ity, whether merely sen­ti­mental or deeply de­vout, and Hitler was mind­ful of their in­flu­ence. Hence, he made a few re­as­sur­ing re­li­gious-sound­ing com­ments on oc­ca­sion, and made prom­ises to strengthen and sup­port the churches – all of which prom­ises would later be broken. Hitler’s com­ments were more than mere polit­ics, however. He did con­sist­ently claim to be a rep­res­ent­at­ive of a higher power, and at times ap­pealed to ‘the Lord . . . the Almighty . . . Provid­ence’ and so on. This ‘higher power’ was not, however, the God of the Chris­tian or Jew­ish Bibles, but was much closer in spirit to the im­per­sonal Ger­man philo­soph­ical ab­strac­tions such as Hegel’s World Spirit, Schopen­hauer’s cos­mic Will, or Fichte’s Ab­so­lute.

Moreover, Hitler offered people what re­li­gion used to offer: mean­ing, pur­pose and hope. He offered a vis­ion of an elect por­tion of hu­man­ity, and an earthly para­dise of Ger­man dom­in­a­tion. This ap­peal to human glory and power was deeply com­pel­ling, and se­duced many church mem­bers and even church lead­ers, who turned away from the teach­ings of Christ in order to fol­low new ideas un­heard of in the pre­vi­ous 1900 years of church his­tory. And, the Ger­mans had suffered a lot. If we had suffered as much, how many of us would also wel­come a dic­tator who prom­ised to re­store order?

The re­sponse of the churches was (with rare ex­cep­tions) the same re­sponse we see today: na­iv­ety, timid­ity, fear, un­will­ing­ness to face ser­i­ous is­sues, the hope that things will just work out some­how by them­selves. Gull­ible Chris­ti­ans who at first sup­por­ted Hitler in the be­lief that he would re­store sta­bil­ity and hon­our to the nation soon found that all of his prom­ises were worth­less. His de­sire was to make the churches com­pletely sub­or­din­ate to the state, until the time they would die out com­pletely.

Pope Pius XII was per­haps an ex­cep­tion
amidst the timid at­ti­tude of the Chris­tian Church
vis-à-vis Nazi Ger­many

These are not merely his­tor­ical ques­tions. The powers of evil that drove Hitler did not dis­ap­pear in 1945, and have emerged in new forms suit­able to our own age. In the past, such great con­quer­ors of world his­tory as At­tila the Hun, Genghis Khan, or nu­mer­ous other build­ers of an­cient em­pires, did not need to re­sort to soph­ist­ic­ated ideo­lo­gies and philo­sophies or well-thought out re­li­gious sys­tems to jus­tify their con­quests. They were driven by a simple love of power and vi­ol­ence, and made no apo­lo­gies or ex­cuses for their blatant de­pred­a­tions. Now that we have be­come more ad­vanced and civ­il­ised, we can still use re­li­gion or philo­sophy to jus­tify our love of power. Now, it is pos­sible for people to kill, con­quer, and an­ni­hil­ate with the sin­cere be­lief (or at least the ex­cuse) that the be­ne­fit of hu­man­ity is their aim. They can en­gage in un­res­trained blood­lust and flat­ter them­selves that their motives are good, and that their vic­tims de­served to die.

And who will op­pose those who do evil in the name of good? Un­for­tu­nately, it must be said that if it were not for the use of pro­longed mil­it­ary force, the Nazis would still be in power today. Protest marches, news­pa­per ed­it­or­i­als and good in­ten­tions are not enough when we are con­fron­ted with people who are will­ing to kill and be killed.

The ef­fic­acy of free speech is often over­rated. It is an ef­fect­ive part of a first line of de­fence, and can alert people to com­ing dangers or ex­pose the flaws of to­tal­it­arian ideo­lo­gies. Its im­port­ance is un­ques­tioned – but when the forces of vi­ol­ence and in­tol­er­ance are on the march, then what? Greater sac­ri­fice and ef­fort are called for. Are we cap­able of them? And to whom will we look for guid­ance and in­spir­a­tion?

When our lib­eral val­ues of peace and tol­er­ance de­gen­er­ate into timid passiv­ity, then the prac­ti­tion­ers of vi­ol­ence as­sert them­selves with in­creas­ing con­fid­ence. Em­boldened by a lack of re­sponse, small groups of com­mit­ted people can go far. The Nazis and the Com­mun­ists were at one time also small minor­it­ies – but a ded­ic­ated and united minor­ity that knows what it wants and is will­ing to fight for it can ul­ti­mately pre­vail against a pass­ive ma­jor­ity.

quote fascism jk 2

What can be done to counter the in­creas­ingly ag­gress­ive ef­forts of the powers of dark­ness? Mere free­dom of speech is not enough. If not re­strained by higher prin­ciples of fair­ness and hon­esty to oth­ers, and by a will­ing­ness to live with op­pos­ing views, it be­comes it­self an av­enue for yet more in­tol­er­ance. If not lim­ited by the con­scious­ness that our rights are also lim­ited by our re­spons­ib­il­it­ies, free speech can even be­come a shel­ter for ex­trem­ists who take ad­vant­age of its pro­vi­sions in order to des­troy it.

Is the Chris­tian ethos of use to us here? It did help to­ward the emer­gence of lib­eral and demo­cratic val­ues in the West, but that was pos­sible only be­cause sig­ni­fic­ant num­bers of people ac­tu­ally be­lieved in or at least re­spec­ted Chris­tian­ity. If what we now really be­lieve in is only per­sonal peace and af­flu­ence, and speak of moral val­ues only be­cause we want to main­tain our com­fort­able status quo, we will not have the con­vic­tion ne­ces­sary to res­ol­utely op­pose those who see our free­dom and tol­er­ance merely as in­vit­a­tions to at­tack.

We need to ask ourselves, “What do we really be­lieve, and how far are we will­ing to go to de­fend those be­liefs?” If we are un­able to even re­cog­nise the prob­lem, as French and Brit­ish dip­lo­mats re­fused to re­cog­nise the prob­lem of Hitler in the 1930s, then the danger will con­tinue to grow until it can no longer be ig­nored. That time is quickly ap­proach­ing.

Gatade dtr 360-bw

“It is far too early to dis­miss the pos­sib­il­ity of a fu­ture Hindu State in India. However, the pos­sib­il­ity does not ap­pear a strong one. The sec­u­lar state has far more than an even chance of sur­vival in India” (India as Sec­u­lar State, 1963). It was the early six­ties when Amer­ican polit­ical sci­ent­ist Don­ald Eu­gene Smith com­men­ted about the “pos­sib­il­ity of a Hindu state in India”. Today, even to a layper­son, the sec­u­lar state in India seems to be stand­ing on very weak found­a­tions, and the pos­sib­il­ity of a Hindu State is far stronger than it was half a cen­tury ago, in 1963.

Per­haps, a per­tin­ent ex­pres­sion of this trans­form­a­tion of India is the meta­morph­osis we wit­ness in the image of Na­thuram Godse – the as­sas­sin of Ma­hatma Gandhi, as part of a con­spir­acy which was hatched by many big­wigs of the Hindutva Su­prem­acist move­ment. The makeover in the image is for evey­one to see: from a mur­derer, a con­spir­ator, ter­ror­ist to a ‘mar­tyr’ who sup­posedly ‘de­serves’ a temple in his name every­where. We also learn that after the ‘suc­cess­ful’ run of a drama in Marathi called Me Na­thuram Boltoy (I Na­thuram Speak) for the last few years, plans are afoot to have a movie made on him, sup­posedly to com­mu­nic­ate his ‘view­point’. With the changed polit­ical situ­ation, where even the cen­sor board of the coun­try is pop­u­lated by rightwing people, one can guess that it won’t have any dif­fi­culty in re­lease. And with an am­bi­ence which is more prone to il­liberal ideas, one can as well proph­esy that it will have a good run.

Few people have noted it, but at­tempts have al­ways been on to ra­tion­al­ise the killing of Gandhi, to jus­tify it in con­vo­luted terms. To blame it, for in­stance, on the issue of ‘Rs 55 crore’ which Gandhi had in­sisted to be given to Pakistan after par­ti­tion, thus mak­ing the killing ap­pear as a spon­tan­eous re­ac­tion of a ‘pat­riot’. This ef­fort tried to ob­fus­cate the fact that there had been five at­tempts on Gandhi’s life since the mid thirties, which in­volved the Hindutva Su­prem­acists (and even a sixth one, ac­cord­ing to Chun­nibhai Vaidya, a Gandhian from Gu­jarat – you can read more on this here). It has al­ways in­volved ob­lit­er­at­ing the fact that the con­spir­acy to as­sas­in­ate the Ma­hatma was hatched by what Justice Ka­poor had con­cluded in 1969: “All these facts taken to­gether were de­struct­ive of any the­ory other than the con­spir­acy to murder by Sav­arkar and his group” (source). The se­lect­ive am­ne­sia, which one wit­nesses vis-a-vis Godse, also misses the fact that he was as­so­ci­ated with the RSS at the time of the as­sas­in­a­tion, even though he tac­tic­ally avoided men­tion­ing his al­le­gi­ance to it at the time of his trial. Gopal Godse, his younger brother and part of the ter­ror mod­ule which had hatched the con­spir­acy, in a de­tailed in­ter­view to Front­line a few years be­fore his death, had shared all these as­pects.

Gandhi’s body, soon after the as­sas­sin­a­tion

One can see that the con­tin­ued ‘glor­i­fic­a­tion of Godse’ and the gov­ern­ment’s turn­ing a blind eye to­wards these at­tempts, sup­posedly by the ‘lun­atic fringe’ of the Hindutva bri­gade, serves a double pur­pose. First, it cre­ates a le­git­im­acy for the ‘ideals’ of a Hindu Rashtra, which Godse es­poused and worked for. Secondly, it com­mu­nic­ates a mes­sage to the core con­stitu­ency will­ing to carve out this Hindu Rashtra from a Sec­u­lar-Demo­cratic India: that they should not get con­fused by the ‘demo­cratic pre­ten­sions’ of the new re­gime and all the talks of ‘the Con­sti­tu­tion as the most sac­red book’ or the calls for a ‘morator­ium on any anti-minor­ity vi­ol­ence’ from the ram­parts of the Red Fort made by the elec­ted Premier of the coun­try – a man who still car­ries the bag­gage of the 2002 gen­o­cide in his homestate Gu­jarat.

The am­bi­gu­ity of the Hindutva Right vis-a-vis Gandhi’s as­sas­in­a­tion – its poor at­tempts to co-opt him and its con­tin­ued si­lence over the con­spir­acy to kill him – also fa­cil­it­ates the ‘san­it­isa­tion’ of the great leader. It would not be sur­pris­ing if to­mor­row we wit­ness se­lect­ive, out of con­text or at times even dressed up quotes from his volume of writ­ings, mis­rep­res­ent­ing Gandhi hav­ing no qualms about the Hindutva pro­ject or le­git­im­ising the ex­clu­c­iv­ist agenda of the Parivar.

quote fascism sg 1

The evol­u­tion of Godse’s image in­vites us to look back, and go in for a deep in­tro­spec­tion about the way we ima­gined sec­u­lar­ism, why its re­duc­tion to the dis­course of the ‘Sarv Dharm Sambhav’ (‘All Re­li­gions Being Equal’) is in­suf­fi­cient, and why it is high time that we un­der­stand and prac­tice it as sep­ar­a­tion of re­li­gion from state. There is no deny­ing the fact that we clearly lack a so­cial found­a­tion for sec­u­lar­ism. The ques­tion arises why more than sixty years after we em­barked on a sec­u­lar path, it has re­mained so weak. But one should re­mark that the em­phasis has al­ways been on main­tain­ing the sec­u­lar­ity of the state, while for­get­ting or neg­lect­ing the im­port­ant as­pect of the sec­u­lar­isa­tion of so­ci­ety. Per­haps, this has to do with the em­phasis of the pro­gress­ive/trans­form­at­ive move­ments on polit­ical-eco­nomic struggles and their neg­lect of in­ter­ven­tion in the so­cial-cul­tural arena.

The in­suf­fi­cient com­fort of ‘Sarv Dharm Sambhav’

State in­sti­tu­tions have also missed oc­ca­sions to en­sure sec­u­lar­ism. India has wit­nessed hun­dreds of com­munal riots since in­de­pend­ence, which saw thou­sands of people dead. Ju­di­cial com­mis­sions ap­poin­ted after such blood­let­ting have poin­ted fin­gers at heads, lead­ers of com­munal or­gan­isa­tions and the lax­ity of the po­lice but none of them – bar­ring a few foot­sol­diers – have ever been pun­ished. Post the 2002 riots, we have also be­come aware of how the state has slowly ab­dic­ated the role of provid­ing re­lief and re­hab­il­it­a­tion to riot af­fected people and vic­tims of com­munal vi­ol­ence, and the va­cuum has been filled by dif­fer­ent com­munity or­gan­isa­tions. One could wit­ness this not only in Gu­jarat, but even in a state like Assam – ruled by the Con­gress con­sec­ut­ively for three terms – when there was vi­ol­ence in the BTAD areas. Ac­cord­ing to a journ­al­ist, most of the re­lief camps set up for the in­tern­ally dis­placed people were run either by Jamaat-e-Is­lami or Jamiat-Ulema-i-Hind, mak­ing the vic­tims and other af­fected people more amen­able to their agen­das.

Those risks exist across India, and also bey­ond our bor­ders. It is really a strange co­in­cid­ence that while we are de­bat­ing the as­cend­ance of the Hindutva Right here, the rest of South Asia looks very sim­ilar, where ma­jor­it­arian forces owing al­le­gi­ance to a par­tic­u­lar re­li­gion or eth­ni­city seem to be on the up­swing. My­an­mar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, the Mal­dives, Pakistan: you name a coun­try and find demo­cratic forces being pushed to the mar­gins while ma­jor­it­arian voices gain a new voice and strength.

quote fascism sg 2

What is no­tice­able in this pic­ture is that the per­pet­rator com­munity changes as you cross the na­tional bor­ders. In Burma, the Buddhists seem to be the per­pet­rat­ors, and the Muslims seem to be at the re­ceiv­ing end. In Bangladesh, there is re­versal of these roles. It is dis­turb­ing to note, in such a volat­ile situ­ation, how one type of fan­at­icism feeds on the other. The Buddhist ex­trem­ists in My­an­mar strengthen Is­lam­ists in Bangladesh, who in turn fur­ther add strength to the Hindutva su­prem­acists in India. The first half of the 20th cen­tury, this area had been wit­ness to anti-co­lo­nial struggles, which had strengthened one an­other’s eman­cip­at­ory as­pir­a­tions. In the first quarter of the 21st cen­tury, we have all been wit­nesses to the ex­plo­sion of ma­jor­it­arian move­ments try­ing to put all the achieve­ments of demo­cracy and sec­u­lar­ism on the back-burner.

A mosque burns, in Meikhtila, Burma

If we move out of the theatre of South Asia, the situ­ation looks equally grim. One def­in­itely per­ceives a global con­text which is much more fa­vour­able to the as­cend­ance, every­where, of rightwing, chau­vin­ist move­ments. The left move­ment had acted as a bul­wark against Fas­cist re­ac­tion in the 1920-30s, but its gen­eral de­cline (bar­ring a few coun­tries) is only fur­ther com­plic­at­ing the pic­ture. The situ­ation as it ex­ists today around us and else­where does not seem hope­ful. All of us yearn­ing and strug­gling for peace, justice, pro­gress seem be on the re­ceiv­ing end of an un­holy al­li­ance between fan­at­icism, re­li­gious ex­trem­ism of vari­ous kinds and the cap­it­al­ist be­hemoths. But that should not deter us from mov­ing ahead, for­ging new solid­ar­it­ies, en­vi­sion­ing a bet­ter fu­ture for hu­man­ity.

Per­haps, in these dark times, it would be worth­while to re­mem­ber how Ra­bindranath Tagore asked people in one of his mem­or­able poems to “go your own way alone, if no one re­sponds to your call” – “Jodi tor dak shune keu na ase tobe ekla cholo re”. A song much liked by Ma­hatma Gandhi, who fell to the as­sas­ins’ bul­lets ex­actly 67 years ago.

Joe Key­sor is a writer cur­rently based in the Sul­tan­ate of Oman. He is work­ing as an Eng­lish teacher in a private school in Oman, where he has lived since 2003. Prior to that, he taught in a col­lege, a uni­versity, and private schools in main­land China for eight years. He has a gradu­ate de­gree from North­ern Illinois Uni­versity and is the au­thor of two books: A Hor­ror of Great Dark­ness (Ath­anatos, 2014) and Hitler, the Holo­caust, and the Bible (Ath­anatos, 2010). You can find his writ­ings on his blog.
Subhash Gat­ade is a journ­al­ist, writer and act­iv­ist. He edits Sand­han, a Hindi journal, and is the au­thor of Pahad Se Uncha Admi (NCERT, 2010) a book on Dasrath Majhi for chil­dren, as well as Godse’s Chil­dren: Hindutva Ter­ror in India (Pharos Media, 2011), The Saf­fron Con­di­tion (Three Es­says, 2011), Beesavi Sadi Me Ambedkar ka Sawal (2014, Dakhal Prakashan) and a book in Gu­jar­ati, Adhunikta ani Dalit (2014, Dar­shan).

Disclaimers: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own. They do not represent their institutions’ view.
LILA Inter-actions will not be responsible for the views presented.
The images and the videos used are only intended to provide multiple perspectives on the fields under discussion.

Images and videos courtesy: Mattiasa | Strange Notions | The Ratzinger Forum | Prashant Challa | Crave Bits | VOA News

Voice courtesy: Shriyam Gupta

Share this debate…

… follow LILA…

… and join the discussion below!

Knowledge is power, and our intention is to bring the power to you. We have initiated a thought movement that aims to strengthen democracy by bringing to you direct voices of important trailblazers and pathmakers, and reclaim deep and patient reflection as an important seed for relevant and sustainable action! Help us take this movement forward. Support Inter-Actions today for as little as Rs. 100.
Donation to LILA is eligible for tax exemption u/s 80 G (5) (VI) of the Income Tax Act 1961 vide order no. NQ CIT (E) 6139 DEL-LE25902-16032015 dated 16/03/2015