The Central Board of Direct Taxes has expanded its data-driven SAKSHAM NUDGE campaign to reach approximately 12,000 tax professionals who have pending tax audit reports. The campaign uses behavioural nudge techniques — sending targeted communications to practitioners — rather than immediate coercive enforcement, prompting voluntary compliance before deadlines trigger penalties. This marks an extension of CBDT's compliance outreach strategy from individual taxpayers to the professional intermediaries who file audit reports on their clients' behalf.

The SAKSHAM NUDGE campaign reflects a shift in tax administration from purely punitive enforcement toward behavioural compliance architecture — using data analytics to identify non-compliant practitioners and prompt them through personalised communications before penal action is triggered.

For CLAT PG aspirants, this story connects to a cluster of static law: the obligation to file tax audit reports under Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the role of Chartered Accountants as statutory auditors in this process, and the penalty framework under Section 271B (penalty for failure to get accounts audited — up to 0.5% of turnover or ₹1.5 lakh, whichever is lower). The CBDT exercises its powers under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act to issue circulars and directions to subordinate authorities and taxpayers.

The broader constitutional dimension is that CBDT is a statutory body created under the Central Board of Revenue Act, 1963, functioning under the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance. Its directions are binding on income tax authorities but do not override judicial orders.

The examiner's interest here is less in the campaign's name and more in the legal framework it enforces — the audit requirement, the penalty for non-compliance, and the legal character of CBDT's directions. Nudge-based compliance campaigns have also appeared in public law discussions as an alternative to coercive state action, making this relevant to administrative law angles in CLAT PG.