Welcome to Online English Section with explanation in Affairs Cloud.com. Here we are creating question sample in Cloze test, which is BASED ON IBPS & SBI PO/CLERK/LIC AAO/RRB, RBI, IPPB,SSC CGL EXAM and other competitive exams !!!
Well before financial year 2017-18 begins, the Lok Sabha has signed off on the Budget with the passage of the Finance Bill of 2017. It includes multiple amendments proposed by the government that did not figure in Arun Jaitley’s speech of February 1, either in letter or in spirit. For instance, while the speech (1) 420 words to proposed measures to improve transparency in electoral funding, amendments have been made to the Companies Act of 2013 that actually turn the clock back on existing disclosure (2) . Till now, companies could only contribute up to 7.5% of their average net profits in the past three financial years to political parties. They were required to disclose in their profit and loss accounts the amount of contributions and the names of political parties to which they were made. The (3) has now been dropped, paving the way for a firm to (4) unlimited capital into political coffers irrespective of its own financial and operational health. Companies would still have to reveal the (5) of their financing of parties, but no longer have to name their (6) parties. For the sake of argument, one could say the 7.5% limit was (7) and restricted willing and able corporate donors’ ability to influence political activity. But doing away with the limit makes firms (8) to funding ‘requests’ from local, regional or national political formations while taking away excuses — such as it being a loss-making unit, or breaching the funding cap.
This would open up new opportunities in crony capitalism. Pressure could be (9) on a company awaiting government clearances, or a loan restructuring from public or cooperative sector financiers. Even a publicly listed company can set up subsidiaries just to fund parties. This removes any pretence of transparency in the process as the donor will not have to disclose who he paid; the recipient has no such obligation either. It is not surprising that India Inc. has remained stoically silent so far. This abandonment of the 7.5% requisite comes in (10) with the proposal to float electoral bonds to give anonymity to political donors.
- 1) dislocated
2) luxate
3) devoted
4) detachded
5) disjoinAnswer – 3)
Explanation : devoted - 1) altered
2) discrepant
3) divergent
4) standards
5) deviatingAnswer – 4)Explanation : standards
- 1) awning
2) ceiling
3) divers
4) contradistinct
5) tentingAnswer – 2)
Explanation : ceiling - 1) deploy
2) antithetic
3) diverse
4) variance
5) tarpaulinAnswer – 1)
Explanation : deploy - 1) contrastive
2) extent
3) clashing
4) contrasting
5) insideAnswer – 2)
Explanation : extent - 1) preferred
2) repudiate
3) reprobate
4) contrary
5) disdainAnswer – 1)
Explanation : preferred - 1) scorn2) despise
3) disregard
4) distinct
5) arbitraryAnswer – 5)
Explanation : arbitrary - 1) rebuff
2) susceptible
3) sneeze at
4) contemn
5) contradistinctiveAnswer – 2)
Explanation : susceptible - 1) disown
2) exerted
3) traverse
4) confront
5) brush offAnswer – 2)
Explanation : exerted - 1) tandem
2) diacritic
3) discrete
4) distinct
5) secludedAnswer – 1)
Explanation : tandem
