
Parliamentary panel rebukes Ministry of Planning, Niti Aayog for poor financial management
The Hindu
Parliamentary panel criticizes Ministry of Planning and Niti Aayog for persistent underutilization and poor financial management practices.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance pulled up the Ministry of Planning for not “planning” its finances better. The committee found that despite spending less than half of the budget allocated to it, the Ministry was allocated ever-higher amounts over the past three financial years.
In its latest report tabled in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday (March 17, 2026), the committee called for “more realistic” planning and financial management by the Ministry. The government’s nodal think-tank, the Niti Aayog, operates through the Ministry.
The committee also noted “flaws in planning” by Niti Aayog when it comes to its finances.
“After overall scrutiny of estimates, allocations and utilisation of the budget grants during financial years under reference, the Committee are of the view that there has been continuous underutilisation of the earmarked funds by the Ministry of Planning,” the Standing Committee’s report said.
The committee noted that the Ministry sought ₹1,203.38 crore of funds for the upcoming financial year 2026-27, which is around 22% higher than the ₹1,006.06 crore as per the Budget Estimates (BE) for 2025-26.
“However, the Actuals for the FY 2023-24 were at ₹290.81 crore against a BE of ₹824.39 crore, which is around 35% of the BE,” the committee noted. “Likewise, the Actuals for the FY 2024-25 were only ₹282.61 crore only, against a BE of ₹837.26 crore i.e. just about 34% in percentage terms.”

The U.S. has launched two investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 against India and other economies to examine practices that may be ‘unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict U.S. commerce’. One probe examines whether countries, including India, are using excess manufacturing capacity to export to the U.S. in a manner that hurts American businesses, while another looks at whether countries have taken ‘sufficient steps’ to prohibit imports of goods produced with forced labour.












