CLAT Practice Test- 24 - CLAT MCQ

With an aim to check flow of black money and evasion of taxes through stock market, market regulator SEBI has decided to impose hefty penalty on brokers facilitating such transactions from tomorrow. The regulator recently came across a loophole in its existing regulations, which was being abused by stock brokers for facilitating tax evasion and flow of black money through fictitious trades in lieu of hefty commissions. To remove this anomaly, SEBI has asked stock exchanges to penalise the brokers transferring trades from one trading account to another after terming them as ‘punching’ errors. The penalty could be as high as 2% of the value of shares traded in the ‘wrong’ account, as per new rules coming into effect from August 1.

In a widely-prevalent, but secretly operated practice, the people looking to evade taxes approach certain brokers to show losses in their stock trading accounts, so that their earnings from other sources are not taxed. These brokers are also approached by people looking to show their black money as earnings made through stock market. In exchange for a commission, generally 5-10% of the total amount, these brokers show desired profits or losses in the accounts of their clients after transferring trades from other accounts, created for such purposes only.

The brokers generally keep conducting both ‘buy’ and ‘sell’ trades in these fictitious accounts so that they can be used accordingly when approached by such clients.

In the market parlance, these deals are known as profit or loss shopping. While profit is purchased to show black money as earnings from the market, the losses are purchased to avoid tax on earnings from other sources.

As the transfer of trades is not allowed from one account to the other in general cases, the brokers show the trades conducted in their own fictitious accounts as ‘punching’ errors. The regulations allow transfer of trades in the cases of genuine errors, as at times ‘punching’ or placing of orders can be made for a wrong client. To check any abuse of this rule, SEBI has asked the bourses to put in place a robust mechanism to identify whether the errors are genuine or not. At the same time, the bourses have been asked to levy penalty on the brokers transferring their non-institutional trades from one account to the other. The penalty would be 1% of the traded value in wrong account, if such trades are up to 5% of the broker’s total non-institutional turnover in a month. The penalty would be 2% of trade value in wrong account, if such transactions exceed 5% of total monthly turnover in a month.

Q. What does the word 'facilitating' as used in the passage mean?

With an aim to check flow of black money and evasion of taxes through stock market, market regulator SEBI has decided to impose hefty penalty on brokers facilitating such transactions from tomorrow. The regulator recently came across a loophole in its existing regulations, which was being abused by stock brokers for facilitating tax evasion and flow of black money through fictitious trades in lieu of hefty commissions. To remove this anomaly, SEBI has asked stock exchanges to penalise the brokers transferring trades from one trading account to another after terming them as ‘punching’ errors. The penalty could be as high as 2% of the value of shares traded in the ‘wrong’ account, as per new rules coming into effect from August 1.

In a widely-prevalent, but secretly operated practice, the people looking to evade taxes approach certain brokers to show losses in their stock trading accounts, so that their earnings from other sources are not taxed. These brokers are also approached by people looking to show their black money as earnings made through stock market. In exchange for a commission, generally 5-10% of the total amount, these brokers show desired profits or losses in the accounts of their clients after transferring trades from other accounts, created for such purposes only.

The brokers generally keep conducting both ‘buy’ and ‘sell’ trades in these fictitious accounts so that they can be used accordingly when approached by such clients.

In the market parlance, these deals are known as profit or loss shopping. While profit is purchased to show black money as earnings from the market, the losses are purchased to avoid tax on earnings from other sources.

As the transfer of trades is not allowed from one account to the other in general cases, the brokers show the trades conducted in their own fictitious accounts as ‘punching’ errors. The regulations allow transfer of trades in the cases of genuine errors, as at times ‘punching’ or placing of orders can be made for a wrong client. To check any abuse of this rule, SEBI has asked the bourses to put in place a robust mechanism to identify whether the errors are genuine or not. At the same time, the bourses have been asked to levy penalty on the brokers transferring their non-institutional trades from one account to the other. The penalty would be 1% of the traded value in wrong account, if such trades are up to 5% of the broker’s total non-institutional turnover in a month. The penalty would be 2% of trade value in wrong account, if such transactions exceed 5% of total monthly turnover in a month.

Q. It can be inferred from the passage that

With an aim to check flow of black money and evasion of taxes through stock market, market regulator SEBI has decided to impose hefty penalty on brokers facilitating such transactions from tomorrow. The regulator recently came across a loophole in its existing regulations, which was being abused by stock brokers for facilitating tax evasion and flow of black money through fictitious trades in lieu of hefty commissions. To remove this anomaly, SEBI has asked stock exchanges to penalise the brokers transferring trades from one trading account to another after terming them as ‘punching’ errors. The penalty could be as high as 2% of the value of shares traded in the ‘wrong’ account, as per new rules coming into effect from August 1.

In a widely-prevalent, but secretly operated practice, the people looking to evade taxes approach certain brokers to show losses in their stock trading accounts, so that their earnings from other sources are not taxed. These brokers are also approached by people looking to show their black money as earnings made through stock market. In exchange for a commission, generally 5-10% of the total amount, these brokers show desired profits or losses in the accounts of their clients after transferring trades from other accounts, created for such purposes only.

The brokers generally keep conducting both ‘buy’ and ‘sell’ trades in these fictitious accounts so that they can be used accordingly when approached by such clients.

In the market parlance, these deals are known as profit or loss shopping. While profit is purchased to show black money as earnings from the market, the losses are purchased to avoid tax on earnings from other sources.

As the transfer of trades is not allowed from one account to the other in general cases, the brokers show the trades conducted in their own fictitious accounts as ‘punching’ errors. The regulations allow transfer of trades in the cases of genuine errors, as at times ‘punching’ or placing of orders can be made for a wrong client. To check any abuse of this rule, SEBI has asked the bourses to put in place a robust mechanism to identify whether the errors are genuine or not. At the same time, the bourses have been asked to levy penalty on the brokers transferring their non-institutional trades from one account to the other. The penalty would be 1% of the traded value in wrong account, if such trades are up to 5% of the broker’s total non-institutional turnover in a month. The penalty would be 2% of trade value in wrong account, if such transactions exceed 5% of total monthly turnover in a month.

Q. What is a ‘punching error' as per the passage?

With an aim to check flow of black money and evasion of taxes through stock market, market regulator SEBI has decided to impose hefty penalty on brokers facilitating such transactions from tomorrow. The regulator recently came across a loophole in its existing regulations, which was being abused by stock brokers for facilitating tax evasion and flow of black money through fictitious trades in lieu of hefty commissions. To remove this anomaly, SEBI has asked stock exchanges to penalise the brokers transferring trades from one trading account to another after terming them as ‘punching’ errors. The penalty could be as high as 2% of the value of shares traded in the ‘wrong’ account, as per new rules coming into effect from August 1.

In a widely-prevalent, but secretly operated practice, the people looking to evade taxes approach certain brokers to show losses in their stock trading accounts, so that their earnings from other sources are not taxed. These brokers are also approached by people looking to show their black money as earnings made through stock market. In exchange for a commission, generally 5-10% of the total amount, these brokers show desired profits or losses in the accounts of their clients after transferring trades from other accounts, created for such purposes only.

The brokers generally keep conducting both ‘buy’ and ‘sell’ trades in these fictitious accounts so that they can be used accordingly when approached by such clients.

In the market parlance, these deals are known as profit or loss shopping. While profit is purchased to show black money as earnings from the market, the losses are purchased to avoid tax on earnings from other sources.

As the transfer of trades is not allowed from one account to the other in general cases, the brokers show the trades conducted in their own fictitious accounts as ‘punching’ errors. The regulations allow transfer of trades in the cases of genuine errors, as at times ‘punching’ or placing of orders can be made for a wrong client. To check any abuse of this rule, SEBI has asked the bourses to put in place a robust mechanism to identify whether the errors are genuine or not. At the same time, the bourses have been asked to levy penalty on the brokers transferring their non-institutional trades from one account to the other. The penalty would be 1% of the traded value in wrong account, if such trades are up to 5% of the broker’s total non-institutional turnover in a month. The penalty would be 2% of trade value in wrong account, if such transactions exceed 5% of total monthly turnover in a month.

Q. Which of the following options is true according to the given passage?

With an aim to check flow of black money and evasion of taxes through stock market, market regulator SEBI has decided to impose hefty penalty on brokers facilitating such transactions from tomorrow. The regulator recently came across a loophole in its existing regulations, which was being abused by stock brokers for facilitating tax evasion and flow of black money through fictitious trades in lieu of hefty commissions. To remove this anomaly, SEBI has asked stock exchanges to penalise the brokers transferring trades from one trading account to another after terming them as ‘punching’ errors. The penalty could be as high as 2% of the value of shares traded in the ‘wrong’ account, as per new rules coming into effect from August 1.

In a widely-prevalent, but secretly operated practice, the people looking to evade taxes approach certain brokers to show losses in their stock trading accounts, so that their earnings from other sources are not taxed. These brokers are also approached by people looking to show their black money as earnings made through stock market. In exchange for a commission, generally 5-10% of the total amount, these brokers show desired profits or losses in the accounts of their clients after transferring trades from other accounts, created for such purposes only.

The brokers generally keep conducting both ‘buy’ and ‘sell’ trades in these fictitious accounts so that they can be used accordingly when approached by such clients.

In the market parlance, these deals are known as profit or loss shopping. While profit is purchased to show black money as earnings from the market, the losses are purchased to avoid tax on earnings from other sources.

As the transfer of trades is not allowed from one account to the other in general cases, the brokers show the trades conducted in their own fictitious accounts as ‘punching’ errors. The regulations allow transfer of trades in the cases of genuine errors, as at times ‘punching’ or placing of orders can be made for a wrong client. To check any abuse of this rule, SEBI has asked the bourses to put in place a robust mechanism to identify whether the errors are genuine or not. At the same time, the bourses have been asked to levy penalty on the brokers transferring their non-institutional trades from one account to the other. The penalty would be 1% of the traded value in wrong account, if such trades are up to 5% of the broker’s total non-institutional turnover in a month. The penalty would be 2% of trade value in wrong account, if such transactions exceed 5% of total monthly turnover in a month.

Q. In the light of the second paragraph what do people who intend to evade taxes do?

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

Q. Which one(s) of the following would possibly NOT be reason(s) for the prosperity of British colonies in America?

1. The colonies produced more ships and steel than Britain.

2. Transfer of large sums of money from Britain to the colonies.

3. The colonies contributed money and troops to the war effort.

4. Britain imposed tax on import of tea into the colonies.

5. Britain had a very high public debt at the end of the war.

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

Q. The use of the word 'specie' in the passage denotes

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

Q. Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

Q. "Gipson described this British largesse…" What is the largesse that Gipson is referring to?

When the "Great War for the Empire" (often incorrectly referred to as the "Seven Years War") ended in 1763, Great Britain was deeply in debt, but was ceded some first rate real estate, namely Canada. The war itself had been conducted on a global scale, including the French and Indian Wars in North America, and it took two separate treaties to terminate hostilities (the treaty of Paris and the treaty of Hubertus burg.) Every major power inEurope participated in the war, and on a vast geographical scale that included hostilities along the African Coast, in Central and North America, India and the Philippines, all at great expense to the participants.

The explanations of the origins of the War are exceptionally intricate and unmemorable.

The Great War included our French and Indian War, which pitted Britain against France in the New World.

The colonists, especially from Massachusetts and Connecticut, contributed money and troops to the effort and after the war Britain reimbursed the colonies £ 1,072, 783, a third of which went to Massachusetts in light of its proportionately greater contribution. This roughly halved the war debts of the Colonies. Gipson described this British largesse as “unprecedented” in the sense that it was apparently the first time in modern history that a parent state reimbursed its colonies for such expenditures. On the other hand, Britain evidently imposed a one shilling per pound tax on tea imported into the American colonies.

When the smoke of war cleared, Britain's public debt was a then staggering sum of £146,000,000, and called for annual interest payments of £4,700,000 which left the British citizenry “with little prospect of reducing the heavy load of taxation.” On the other hand, the War had brought “unprecedented prosperity” to the colonies, even great fortunes, because of the “shipment of vast sums of . . . specie from England to America, not only as pay for the soldiers, teamsters, army pioneers, bateau-men, and others, but also for the purchase at good prices of enormous quantities of food, supplies and other things needed for carrying on the war.”

There were other effects as well, all of which presented some peril for Britain; the American colonies soon emerged as an economic powerhouse, soon out producing Britain in, ships and steel because of its natural advantages. In Great Britain, in the 1760’s there was almost a 100% face value tax on imported tea.

This was comprised of a 25% import tax on face value plus an additional excise of 25% plus 1 shilling per pound for tea sold for domestic consumption.

Q. Which of the following is the author most likely to agree with?

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. In the first line of the passage, which are the two capitals that the author is referring to?

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. Why did the French fans gather to welcome their team despite its defeat in World Cup 2006?

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. Choose the most appropriate title for the given passage:

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. What does the word 'tarnished' mean in the context of the passage?

Ever since the final whistle brought World Cup 2006 to a close, the atmosphere in the two neighbouring capitals could not be more different. In Rome, there were scenes of euphoria over Italy's victory. Ecstatic Italian demonstrators partied into the early hours of the morning.

The victorious team was given a rapturous welcome both at the airport and in Rome's Circolo Massimo, where over a million fans braved the Roman sun to greet the returning heroes. The great expanse of the Circolo Massimo was strewn with red, white and green flags, while the air was thick with the crowd's hooting, chanting and music-making. Late on Monday the winning team was expected to be greeted by Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Then, a parade through the streets of Rome, with the solid gold trophy in an open top bus.

In Paris, the Champs Elysees, which had seen crowds of up to 5,00,000 when France entered the quarterfinals and then the semifinals, had barely 50,000 fans who felt they had to tell their team it had been heroic despite the defeat. But their heart was not in it. A special TV show organised to celebrate victory turned into a virtual wake. [Mournful faces were trying to mask a sense of overwhelming sorrow, not least because superstar Zidane's final match had been tarnished by his expulsion from the game.]

There will be no parade down the Champs Elysees as had been planned. The players had lunch with President Jacques Chirac on their return. But a tight-lipped Raymond Domenech said brusquely: "I am the manager, I decide. There will be no parade." Instead, fans had a glimpse of their favourite stars from a balcony of the chic Crillon Hotel at the Place de la Concorde. In Italy, on the other hand, the victory was experienced as a double triumph, with the feeling that Italians had avenged their Euro 2000 defeat at the hands of the French. The Italian press was lavish in its praise for the squadra azzura with headlines like "The world Belongs to Us" or simply, "Champions." Newspapers hoped this victory would augur a new era of hope and economic recovery for Italy.

Q. Which of the following is incorrect with respect to the passage?

1. Zidane was excluded from the football team before the final match got over.

2. France mourned over a not-so-glorious end of Zidane's career.

3. Italy has lost a match against France.

4. Italy triumphed over France twice in World Cup 2006

Images are the core of society today; they have become the means of massive communication and, therefore, the essence of daily life. Humans have become homus photographicus. Almost every person has a camera, whether it is in a cellphone, iPad, tablet, point and shoot or any other device. People have learned to express emotions, ideas and concepts through images regardless of its complexity. Photos may be digital images but not every image is a photograph. In general, the image is defined as a figure, the representation of something. That is, the copy of an object, a mental representation is subject to cognition and interpretation.

The material images, under their production scheme, are prone to depict the world on a canvas, the medium determines how people look, read, sing and tell stories.

Additionally, the narratives are considered to be truthful because, in order to photograph an object, it has to exist; it has a referent, contrary to painting, where the artist may create chimeras based on imagination. Nonetheless, the veracity of a picture may be questioned since it could be staged or transformed into something else, even something that is not as it appears in reality. For example, a portrait may be an idealistic version of a person, an alter ego or simply not the subject as known in daily life. To illustrate further, the case of Hippolyte Bayard becomes interesting to mention. In 1840, Bayard photographed himself as a drowned man, and people who saw the picture believed it was real. At the time, these images were believed to be real because a mechanic device, a camera, had taken them. In this way, Bayard created an alternative reality, where he was found dead.

Q. What is the most important message conveyed by the passage?

Images are the core of society today; they have become the means of massive communication and, therefore, the essence of daily life. Humans have become homus photographicus. Almost every person has a camera, whether it is in a cellphone, iPad, tablet, point and shoot or any other device. People have learned to express emotions, ideas and concepts through images regardless of its complexity. Photos may be digital images but not every image is a photograph. In general, the image is defined as a figure, the representation of something. That is, the copy of an object, a mental representation is subject to cognition and interpretation.

The material images, under their production scheme, are prone to depict the world on a canvas, the medium determines how people look, read, sing and tell stories.

Additionally, the narratives are considered to be truthful because, in order to photograph an object, it has to exist; it has a referent, contrary to painting, where the artist may create chimeras based on imagination. Nonetheless, the veracity of a picture may be questioned since it could be staged or transformed into something else, even something that is not as it appears in reality. For example, a portrait may be an idealistic version of a person, an alter ego or simply not the subject as known in daily life. To illustrate further, the case of Hippolyte Bayard becomes interesting to mention. In 1840, Bayard photographed himself as a drowned man, and people who saw the picture believed it was real. At the time, these images were believed to be real because a mechanic device, a camera, had taken them. In this way, Bayard created an alternative reality, where he was found dead.

Q. As per the passage, which of the following can possibly be a limitation of a photographic image?

Images are the core of society today; they have become the means of massive communication and, therefore, the essence of daily life. Humans have become homus photographicus. Almost every person has a camera, whether it is in a cellphone, iPad, tablet, point and shoot or any other device. People have learned to express emotions, ideas and concepts through images regardless of its complexity. Photos may be digital images but not every image is a photograph. In general, the image is defined as a figure, the representation of something. That is, the copy of an object, a mental representation is subject to cognition and interpretation.

The material images, under their production scheme, are prone to depict the world on a canvas, the medium determines how people look, read, sing and tell stories.

Additionally, the narratives are considered to be truthful because, in order to photograph an object, it has to exist; it has a referent, contrary to painting, where the artist may create chimeras based on imagination. Nonetheless, the veracity of a picture may be questioned since it could be staged or transformed into something else, even something that is not as it appears in reality. For example, a portrait may be an idealistic version of a person, an alter ego or simply not the subject as known in daily life. To illustrate further, the case of Hippolyte Bayard becomes interesting to mention. In 1840, Bayard photographed himself as a drowned man, and people who saw the picture believed it was real. At the time, these images were believed to be real because a mechanic device, a camera, had taken them. In this way, Bayard created an alternative reality, where he was found dead.

Q. What is meant by the word ‘chimera’?

Images are the core of society today; they have become the means of massive communication and, therefore, the essence of daily life. Humans have become homus photographicus. Almost every person has a camera, whether it is in a cellphone, iPad, tablet, point and shoot or any other device. People have learned to express emotions, ideas and concepts through images regardless of its complexity. Photos may be digital images but not every image is a photograph. In general, the image is defined as a figure, the representation of something. That is, the copy of an object, a mental representation is subject to cognition and interpretation.

The material images, under their production scheme, are prone to depict the world on a canvas, the medium determines how people look, read, sing and tell stories.

Additionally, the narratives are considered to be truthful because, in order to photograph an object, it has to exist; it has a referent, contrary to painting, where the artist may create chimeras based on imagination. Nonetheless, the veracity of a picture may be questioned since it could be staged or transformed into something else, even something that is not as it appears in reality. For example, a portrait may be an idealistic version of a person, an alter ego or simply not the subject as known in daily life. To illustrate further, the case of Hippolyte Bayard becomes interesting to mention. In 1840, Bayard photographed himself as a drowned man, and people who saw the picture believed it was real. At the time, these images were believed to be real because a mechanic device, a camera, had taken them. In this way, Bayard created an alternative reality, where he was found dead.

Q. According to the passage, images have taken center stage in today’s society because

Images are the core of society today; they have become the means of massive communication and, therefore, the essence of daily life. Humans have become homus photographicus. Almost every person has a camera, whether it is in a cellphone, iPad, tablet, point and shoot or any other device. People have learned to express emotions, ideas and concepts through images regardless of its complexity. Photos may be digital images but not every image is a photograph. In general, the image is defined as a figure, the representation of something. That is, the copy of an object, a mental representation is subject to cognition and interpretation.

The material images, under their production scheme, are prone to depict the world on a canvas, the medium determines how people look, read, sing and tell stories.

Additionally, the narratives are considered to be truthful because, in order to photograph an object, it has to exist; it has a referent, contrary to painting, where the artist may create chimeras based on imagination. Nonetheless, the veracity of a picture may be questioned since it could be staged or transformed into something else, even something that is not as it appears in reality. For example, a portrait may be an idealistic version of a person, an alter ego or simply not the subject as known in daily life. To illustrate further, the case of Hippolyte Bayard becomes interesting to mention. In 1840, Bayard photographed himself as a drowned man, and people who saw the picture believed it was real. At the time, these images were believed to be real because a mechanic device, a camera, had taken them. In this way, Bayard created an alternative reality, where he was found dead.

Q. Which of the following is true in the context of the passage?

Power in all its forms is irrational; - it is like the horse that drags the carriage blindfolded. The moral element in it is only represented in the man who drives the horse.

Passive resistance is a force which is not necessarily moral in itself; it can be used against truth as well as for it. The danger inherent in all force grows stronger when it is likely to gain success, for then it becomes temptation.

I know your teaching is to fight against evil by the help of good. But such a fight is for heroes and not for men led by impulses of the moment. Evil on one side naturally begets evil on the other, injustice leading to violence and insult to vengefulness. Unfortunately, such a force has already been started, and either through panic or through wrath our authorities has shown us the claws whose sure effect is to drive some of us into the secret path of resentment and others into utter demoralization. In this crisis you, as a great leader of men, have stood among us to proclaim your faith in the ideal which you know to be that of India, the ideal which is both against the cowardliness of hidden revenge and the cowed submissiveness of the terror-stricken. This power of good must prove its truth and strength by its fearlessness, by its refusal to accept any imposition which depends for its success upon its power to produce frightfulness and is not ashamed to use its machines of destruction to terrorize a population completely disarmed. We must know that moral conquest does not consist in success, that failure does not deprive it of its dignity and worth.

Those who believe in spiritual life know that to stand against wrong which has overwhelming material power behind it is victory itself, it is the victory of the active faith in the ideal in the teeth of evident defeat.

Q. Which one of the following thoughts is conveyed by Tagore when he associates power with a blind horse?

Power in all its forms is irrational; - it is like the horse that drags the carriage blindfolded. The moral element in it is only represented in the man who drives the horse.

Passive resistance is a force which is not necessarily moral in itself; it can be used against truth as well as for it. The danger inherent in all force grows stronger when it is likely to gain success, for then it becomes temptation.

I know your teaching is to fight against evil by the help of good. But such a fight is for heroes and not for men led by impulses of the moment. Evil on one side naturally begets evil on the other, injustice leading to violence and insult to vengefulness. Unfortunately, such a force has already been started, and either through panic or through wrath our authorities has shown us the claws whose sure effect is to drive some of us into the secret path of resentment and others into utter demoralization. In this crisis you, as a great leader of men, have stood among us to proclaim your faith in the ideal which you know to be that of India, the ideal which is both against the cowardliness of hidden revenge and the cowed submissiveness of the terror-stricken. This power of good must prove its truth and strength by its fearlessness, by its refusal to accept any imposition which depends for its success upon its power to produce frightfulness and is not ashamed to use its machines of destruction to terrorize a population completely disarmed. We must know that moral conquest does not consist in success, that failure does not deprive it of its dignity and worth.

Those who believe in spiritual life know that to stand against wrong which has overwhelming material power behind it is victory itself, it is the victory of the active faith in the ideal in the teeth of evident defeat.

Q. Which of the following problems has been cited by Tagore?

Power in all its forms is irrational; - it is like the horse that drags the carriage blindfolded. The moral element in it is only represented in the man who drives the horse.

Passive resistance is a force which is not necessarily moral in itself; it can be used against truth as well as for it. The danger inherent in all force grows stronger when it is likely to gain success, for then it becomes temptation.

I know your teaching is to fight against evil by the help of good. But such a fight is for heroes and not for men led by impulses of the moment. Evil on one side naturally begets evil on the other, injustice leading to violence and insult to vengefulness. Unfortunately, such a force has already been started, and either through panic or through wrath our authorities has shown us the claws whose sure effect is to drive some of us into the secret path of resentment and others into utter demoralization. In this crisis you, as a great leader of men, have stood among us to proclaim your faith in the ideal which you know to be that of India, the ideal which is both against the cowardliness of hidden revenge and the cowed submissiveness of the terror-stricken. This power of good must prove its truth and strength by its fearlessness, by its refusal to accept any imposition which depends for its success upon its power to produce frightfulness and is not ashamed to use its machines of destruction to terrorize a population completely disarmed. We must know that moral conquest does not consist in success, that failure does not deprive it of its dignity and worth.

Those who believe in spiritual life know that to stand against wrong which has overwhelming material power behind it is victory itself, it is the victory of the active faith in the ideal in the teeth of evident defeat.

Q. How has the passage defined victory?

Power in all its forms is irrational; - it is like the horse that drags the carriage blindfolded. The moral element in it is only represented in the man who drives the horse.

Passive resistance is a force which is not necessarily moral in itself; it can be used against truth as well as for it. The danger inherent in all force grows stronger when it is likely to gain success, for then it becomes temptation.

I know your teaching is to fight against evil by the help of good. But such a fight is for heroes and not for men led by impulses of the moment. Evil on one side naturally begets evil on the other, injustice leading to violence and insult to vengefulness. Unfortunately, such a force has already been started, and either through panic or through wrath our authorities has shown us the claws whose sure effect is to drive some of us into the secret path of resentment and others into utter demoralization. In this crisis you, as a great leader of men, have stood among us to proclaim your faith in the ideal which you know to be that of India, the ideal which is both against the cowardliness of hidden revenge and the cowed submissiveness of the terror-stricken. This power of good must prove its truth and strength by its fearlessness, by its refusal to accept any imposition which depends for its success upon its power to produce frightfulness and is not ashamed to use its machines of destruction to terrorize a population completely disarmed. We must know that moral conquest does not consist in success, that failure does not deprive it of its dignity and worth.

Those who believe in spiritual life know that to stand against wrong which has overwhelming material power behind it is victory itself, it is the victory of the active faith in the ideal in the teeth of evident defeat.

Q. Which of the following converts the dangers of power into a temptation?

Power in all its forms is irrational; - it is like the horse that drags the carriage blindfolded. The moral element in it is only represented in the man who drives the horse.

Passive resistance is a force which is not necessarily moral in itself; it can be used against truth as well as for it. The danger inherent in all force grows stronger when it is likely to gain success, for then it becomes temptation.

I know your teaching is to fight against evil by the help of good. But such a fight is for heroes and not for men led by impulses of the moment. Evil on one side naturally begets evil on the other, injustice leading to violence and insult to vengefulness. Unfortunately, such a force has already been started, and either through panic or through wrath our authorities has shown us the claws whose sure effect is to drive some of us into the secret path of resentment and others into utter demoralization. In this crisis you, as a great leader of men, have stood among us to proclaim your faith in the ideal which you know to be that of India, the ideal which is both against the cowardliness of hidden revenge and the cowed submissiveness of the terror-stricken. This power of good must prove its truth and strength by its fearlessness, by its refusal to accept any imposition which depends for its success upon its power to produce frightfulness and is not ashamed to use its machines of destruction to terrorize a population completely disarmed. We must know that moral conquest does not consist in success, that failure does not deprive it of its dignity and worth.

Those who believe in spiritual life know that to stand against wrong which has overwhelming material power behind it is victory itself, it is the victory of the active faith in the ideal in the teeth of evident defeat.

Q. Which of the following best reflects the ideals of Gandhi as mentioned in the passage?

Since the dawn of civilization mankind has always been plagued by some or the other form of disease. The number of lives accounted for by each disease has, through the decades, varied continually, though none of them can be singled out as the leading cause of death, collectively they are the leading cause of deaths. The origin or evolution of diseases has never been too clearcut a phenomenon, though some wishful dreamers even attribute it to Pandora's box of troubles. A survey of the five leading causes of deaths during a period from the early 1900s to the mid 1900s shows a distinct and significant trend. In the early 1900s these causes in order of number of death's caused were:

i. Tuberculosis,

ii. Pneumonia,

iii. Intestinal diseases,

iv. Heart diseases,

v. and Cerebral haemorrhage and thrombosis.

A decade later the only change was that heart disease had moved from fourth to fifth place, tuberculosis now being second, and pneumonia third. Toward the later part of this period, however, the list had changed profoundly.

Heart diseases were far out in front; cancer, which had come up from eighth place, was second; and cerebral haemorrhage and thrombosis, third. Fatal accidents, which had been well down the list, were now fourth, and nephritis was fifth. All of these are, of course, composites rather than single diseases, and it is significant that, except for accidents, they are characteristic of the advanced rather than the early or middle years of life.

Q. On the basis of the passage, which of the following statements is most tenable?

Since the dawn of civilization mankind has always been plagued by some or the other form of disease. The number of lives accounted for by each disease has, through the decades, varied continually, though none of them can be singled out as the leading cause of death, collectively they are the leading cause of deaths. The origin or evolution of diseases has never been too clearcut a phenomenon, though some wishful dreamers even attribute it to Pandora's box of troubles. A survey of the five leading causes of deaths during a period from the early 1900s to the mid 1900s shows a distinct and significant trend. In the early 1900s these causes in order of number of death's caused were:

i. Tuberculosis,

ii. Pneumonia,

iii. Intestinal diseases,

iv. Heart diseases,

v. and Cerebral haemorrhage and thrombosis.

A decade later the only change was that heart disease had moved from fourth to fifth place, tuberculosis now being second, and pneumonia third. Toward the later part of this period, however, the list had changed profoundly.

Heart diseases were far out in front; cancer, which had come up from eighth place, was second; and cerebral haemorrhage and thrombosis, third. Fatal accidents, which had been well down the list, were now fourth, and nephritis was fifth. All of these are, of course, composites rather than single diseases, and it is significant that, except for accidents, they are characteristic of the advanced rather than the early or middle years of life.

Q. Which one of the following statements is most nearly correct?