The Delhi government approved a new excise policy, lowering the minimum age for consumption of alcohol to 21 years. Earlier, the legal age of drinking in New Delhi was 25. With this change, the national capital aligns with the majority of Indian states where the legal drinking age is 21. While some states have the age limit as low as 18, a few maintain it at 25. In certain states, alcohol consumption is completely prohibited.

Which of the following can be logically inferred from the above statement?

(I) The Central government opposes the Delhi government's decision.

(II) The Delhi government aims to boost revenue through the new excise policy.

(III) States that prohibit alcohol have lower annual revenue compared to Delhi.

Question

The Delhi government approved a new excise policy, lowering the minimum age for consumption of alcohol to 21 years. Earlier, the legal age of drinking in New Delhi was 25. With this change, the national capital aligns with the majority of Indian states where the legal drinking age is 21. While some states have the age limit as low as 18, a few maintain it at 25. In certain states, alcohol consumption is completely prohibited.

Which of the following can be logically inferred from the above statement?

(I) The Central government opposes the Delhi government's decision.

(II) The Delhi government aims to boost revenue through the new excise policy.

(III) States that prohibit alcohol have lower annual revenue compared to Delhi.

Accepted Answer

**Solution:**

1. Statement (I) claims that the Central government is against the Delhi government's decision. The passage does not mention any stance or reaction from the Central government, so this cannot be inferred.

2. Statement (II) suggests that the Delhi government intends to increase revenue through the new excise policy. Since lowering the legal drinking age generally leads to higher alcohol sales and thus potentially more excise revenue, this is a reasonable inference.

3. Statement (III) asserts that states prohibiting alcohol have lower annual revenue compared to Delhi. The passage does not provide any information about revenue comparisons between states, so this cannot be concluded.

Therefore, only statement (II) can be logically inferred from the passage.

**Answer:** (d) Only II

Answer

Answer

Answer

Answer