The Constitution of India
Article 117
Special provisions as to financial Bills
(1) A Bill or amendment making provision for any of the matters specified in sub-clauses (a) to (f) of clause (1) of article 110 shall not be introduced or moved except on the recommendation of the President and a Bill making such provision shall not be introduced in the Council of States:
Provided that no recommendation shall be required under this clause for the moving of an amendment making provision for the reduction or abolition of any tax.
(2) A Bill or amendment shall not be deemed to make provision for any of the matters aforesaid by reason only that it provides for the imposition of fines or other pecuniary penalties, or for the demand or payment of fees for licences or fees for services rendered, or by reason that it provides for the imposition, abolition, remission, alteration or regulation of any tax by any local authority or body for local purposes.
(3) A Bill which, if enacted and brought into operation, would involve expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of India shall not be passed by either House of Parliament unless the President has recommended to that House the consideration of the Bill.
Why this exists
The framers wanted the executive (through the President, acting on the Council of Ministers' advice) to control the country's purse strings, since taxation and spending decisions can destabilize public finances if made carelessly by individual members of Parliament. At the same time, they wanted to preserve the Lok Sabha's primacy over money matters (mirroring the British parliamentary tradition where the elected lower house controls finance), while still giving the Rajya Sabha some voice on broader financial bills that aren't pure 'Money Bills' under Article 110.
How courts read it
Indian courts have mostly examined the boundary between ordinary financial bills (Article 117) and true 'Money Bills' (Article 110) rather than Article 117 in isolation. Disputes—such as challenges to laws certified as Money Bills by the Speaker—have asked whether a bill was wrongly routed to avoid Rajya Sabha scrutiny, indirectly touching Article 117's framework. Courts have generally been cautious about second-guessing the Speaker's certification, though some judgments have flagged concerns about the practice, without overturning Article 117's core scheme.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: Any bill involving money is a 'Money Bill' and follows the same strict rules.
Fact: Article 117 shows there are broader 'Financial Bills' that involve money but aren't Money Bills under Article 110 — they follow different rules, like being allowed to start in the Rajya Sabha for expenditure bills under clause (3). - Myth: The President's recommendation is just a formality with no real requirement.
Fact: The Constitution makes this recommendation a mandatory precondition — without it, such bills cannot be validly introduced or, in the case of clause (3), passed.