Which one of the following is NOT charged on the Consolidated Fund of India?

The correct answer is B, Article 112. Article 112 requires the President to cause a statement of the estimated receipts and expenditure of the Government of India for every financial year to be laid before both Houses of Parliament, and the Constitution calls that statement the Annual Financial Statement; in ordinary speech it is the Budget. A is wrong because Article 110 only defines what a money bill is and lists the six matters a money bill may deal with; it says nothing about the Budget being laid before the Houses. C is wrong because Article 114 deals with the Appropriation Bill, the law by which money is actually withdrawn from the Consolidated Fund of India after the grants have been voted. D is wrong because Article 117 carries the special provisions for financial bills, chiefly that they are introduced in the Lok Sabha on the recommendation of the President.

The correct answer is B, 14 days. Under Article 109 a money bill passed by the Lok Sabha goes to the Rajya Sabha, which must return it within fourteen days with or without recommendations; if it is not returned in that period the bill is deemed to have been passed by both Houses in the form in which the Lok Sabha passed it. The Lok Sabha is free to accept or reject any recommendation the Rajya Sabha makes. A is wrong because no financial stage of a bill is fixed at seven days. C is wrong because twenty-one days has nothing to do with a money bill; it is the period often confused with the time limits in other legislative provisions. D is wrong because thirty days is not a constitutional period for a money bill either; candidates sometimes mix it up with the six months the Rajya Sabha may hold an ordinary bill before a deadlock arises.

The correct answer is B, reduced by one hundred rupees. A token cut is moved to ventilate a specific grievance within the sphere of responsibility of the Government of India, and its form is that the amount of the demand be reduced by one hundred rupees; the sum is symbolic and the purpose is the discussion it forces. A is wrong because reducing the demand to one rupee is a policy cut, which expresses disapproval of the policy underlying the demand itself. C is wrong because a reduction by a specified amount for the sake of economy is an economy cut, where the member suggests that the same work can be done more cheaply. D is wrong because no cut motion asks for a demand to be withdrawn; the Lok Sabha can of course refuse a demand outright by voting it down, but that is a refusal of the demand, not a cut motion.

The correct answer is C, the President of India. Article 267(1) allows Parliament by law to establish a Contingency Fund of India in the nature of an imprest, placed at the disposal of the President, out of which he may make advances to meet unforeseen expenditure pending authorisation by Parliament; the fund is held on his behalf by the Finance Secretary and is recouped once Parliament votes the money. A is wrong because the Prime Minister has no separate constitutional custody of any fund of India. B is wrong because the Speaker presides over the Lok Sabha and certifies money bills but holds no fund. D is wrong because the Comptroller and Auditor General audits spending after it happens and is deliberately kept out of the custody and sanction of money, since an auditor cannot audit his own payments.

The correct answer is B, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. Article 110(3) provides that if a question arises whether a bill is a money bill, the decision of the Speaker of the House of the People is final, and the Speaker certifies the bill as such when it is transmitted to the Rajya Sabha and when it is presented to the President. A is wrong because the President's recommendation is needed to introduce a money bill, but he does not classify it. C is wrong because the Finance Minister introduces financial legislation and defends it, yet the character of the bill is not his to settle. D is wrong because the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha presides over the House that has the least say in a money bill; giving him the certifying power would defeat the very purpose of the Lok Sabha's financial supremacy.