Key Points
- Garg questions credibility of India’s latest GDP estimate
- He says revised base inflated reported growth
- Debate centres on comparability of GDP series
ISLAMABAD: India’s latest economic growth figures have triggered a sharp dispute over the credibility of official data after former Finance Secretary Subhash Chandra Garg questioned the government’s reported 7.8 per cent gross domestic product (GDP) growth for the April-June quarter of fiscal year 2026-27.
Garg has argued that a sharp downward revision to the GDP estimate for the corresponding quarter of the previous fiscal year has significantly boosted the headline growth rate.
According to the former Indian secretary, nominal GDP growth would have been around 2.6 per cent had the earlier base figure not been revised. He has therefore questioned whether the latest data accurately reflects the underlying strength of the Indian economy.
India’s Methodology controversy
The controversy followed the release of revised national accounts data by India’s Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI), which reported real GDP growth of 7.8 per cent in the first quarter, compared with 6.9 per cent a year earlier. Nominal GDP increased 10.3 per cent to around $1.04 trillion, according to the official estimates.
READ ALSO: Thousands of Indian Food Brands Found Unsafe
Garg highlights the revision of the previous year’s current-price GDP estimate, arguing that the figure was reduced from roughly $1.01 trillion to about $940 billion under the revised calculations.
He said the change materially affects the base against which the latest growth is measured and creates a much stronger headline growth rate.
The former top official’s criticism was amplified by India’s opposition Congress party, with senior leader Jairam Ramesh accusing the government of using statistical presentation to project an exaggerated economic performance. Ramesh cited Garg’s assessment that actual growth could be closer to 2.6 per cent.
The government has defended its statistics. Statistics Secretary Saurabh Garg, who shares the last name with the former finance secretary, said the revisions reflected the introduction of a new GDP series with 2022-23 as the base year, updated data sources and methodological improvements rather than any systematic attempt to lower the previous year’s figures.
The new methodology also incorporates more granular price information through the producer price index and increases the number of price deflators used in GDP calculations from about 180 to more than 300.
Officials said quarterly revisions over the past three years had moved in both directions, rather than consistently reducing earlier estimates.
The controversy nevertheless highlights broader concerns surrounding transparency and predictability in India’s economic statistics.
Questions over revisions, methodology and the availability of detailed underlying data have made it difficult for outside observers to assess some of the sharp changes in quarterly estimates.
Under the new series, real GDP at constant prices stood at Rs81.36 lakh crore in the June quarter, against Rs75.46 lakh crore in the corresponding quarter of FY26, producing the reported 7.8 per cent real growth rate. Real gross value added increased 8.2 per cent.
Manufacturing expanded 9.2 per cent and services grew about 10 per cent, supported by stronger investment and consumption.
The dispute nevertheless highlights broader concerns surrounding transparency and predictability in India’s economic statistics.
Questions over revisions, methodology and the availability of detailed underlying data have made it difficult for outside observers to comprehend some of the sharp changes in quarterly estimates.
The government maintains that the 7.8 per cent figure is calculated under a more comprehensive statistical framework. On the other hand, Garg argues that the revisions to the comparison base warrant serious doubts about the headline number.
India is expected to provide further methodological details later this month, which could provide clarity on the disputed calculations.
