<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<mods xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.1" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-1.xsd">
  <titleInfo>
    <title>NDA and UPA budgets: continuity or change?</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart>Lalvani, Mala</namePart>
    <role>
      <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">creator</roleTerm>
    </role>
  </name>
  <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
  <originInfo>
    <place>
      <placeTerm type="code" authority="marccountry">xu|</placeTerm>
    </place>
    <dateIssued>2006</dateIssued>
    <issuance>continuing</issuance>
  </originInfo>
  <language>
    <languageTerm authority="iso639-2b" type="code">ng </languageTerm>
  </language>
  <physicalDescription>
    <extent>p.1318-321.</extent>
  </physicalDescription>
  <abstract>This article attempts to judge the fiscal performance of the UPA and NDA governments from the point of view of broad macro-fiscal indicators. On the tax front, the UPA deserves credit for improved performance but there are severe misgivings about the lower proportions being allocated to capital expenditure in key social and economic services. The fact that the UPA has not curbed subsidies and is spending higher proportions on administration than the NDA are some obvious flaws. The performance of the UPA is well below expectations. - Reproduced.</abstract>
  <subject>
    <topic>Budget - India</topic>
  </subject>
  <subject>
    <topic>Budget</topic>
  </subject>
  <relatedItem type="host">
    <name>
      <namePart>Economic and Political Weekly</namePart>
    </name>
  </relatedItem>
  <recordInfo>
    <recordCreationDate encoding="marc">180718</recordCreationDate>
  </recordInfo>
</mods>
