Related Questions

In the question below, are given a statement followed by three courses of actions numbered I, II and III. On the basis of the information given, you have to assume everything in the statement to be true, and then decide which of the suggested courses of action logically follow (s) for pursuing. Statement: With one year to go for 2019 parliamentary elections, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has stepped in to ensure results can be seen on the ground. The Centre has asked states to focus on impactful and public-private-partnership based smart city projects, which would show results over the next one year and have a review mechanism in place. Ministry of housing and urban affairs, the nodal ministry for Smart Cities Mission has identified 261 impactful ventures worth Rs. 31,000 crore and PPP projects worth Rs. 32,000 crore for the states to work on. Courses of Action: I. The move follows directives from the Prime Minister. During a review of Smart Cities mission last week, PM Modi had emphasized on early implementation of projects and suggested that the chief secretaries of all states should review the progress of the implementation. II. These identified projects account for an investment of Rs. 31,112 crore. The states have also been asked to work on 370 PPP projects that involve an investment of Rs. 32,410 crore The impactful projects identified range from building 40 outdoor fitness centres in New Delhi Municipal Council area at a cost of Rs. 1.31 crore to redevelopment of 340 acre area in Bhopal at a cost of Rs. 3,000 crore.  III. Secretary (housing and urban affairs) D. S. Mishra has written to chief secretaries of states and asked them to focus on the belated implementation of smart city projects that have a visible and transformative impact in the lives of citizens in identified smart cities.
Two statements are followed by three Conclusions I, II and III. You have to consider the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. You are to decide which of the given conclusions can definitely be drawn from the given statements and indicate your answer accordingly. Statements: I. Fraud-hit Punjab National (PNB) today said it has no plans to close operations at its Brady House branch, the fountainhead of the Rs. 14,000 crore Nirav Modi scam. II. Modi and his uncle Mehul Choksi, in connivance with certain bank officials, allegedly cheated PNB of about Rs. 14,000 crore through issuance of fraudulent Letters of Undertaking (LoUs).  Conclusions: I. PNB's Brady House branch in Mumbai had fraudulently issued LoUs for the group of companies belonging to Nirav Modi since March 2011. PNB has no plans to close operations in the Brady House branch in Mumbai. II. Reallocation of some of the accounts is part of the regular restructuring process at PNB to strengthen internal systems and processes and centralize certain critical functions  III. With regards to provision made for the loss incurred on account of the Nirav Modi fraud, the bank provided Rs. 7,178 crore, 50 per cent of the total amount of Rs. 14,356 crore, in the fourth quarter of 2017-18. The remaining amount will be covered in the three quarters of the current fiscal year.
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments, is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: Over the past five decades, term deposits in banks have emerged as the primary instrument of financial savings for the average Indian after former premier Indira Gandhi embarked on a mission to nationalise the lenders - 14 in the first tranche - on a rainy afternoon in July 1969. Coming with an unsaid sovereign guarantee of sorts, fixed deposits (FDs) seemingly offered investors liquidity - and safety - as nationalisation sought, in part, to arrest the 40-odd bank failures a year.  Now, however, deposits must burnish their allure to retain leadership status in an increasingly crowded financial marketplace that offers choice. Why? Arguments: I. If FDs are giving 7.5% and the effective tax rate is 10%, one gets close to 5-5.2% return. Similarly, in the case of FMP, if the rate is 7.5%, effective taxation comes to 10%, one gets 6.75%. It is higher than the effective returns on bank deposits.  II. People are becoming aware of more asset classes that offer better returns, and the quest for such assets became more pronounced after interest rates fell substantially over the past four years.  III. Savers are looking at mutual funds and provident funds for the higher return.