{
  "id": 5199700,
  "title": "Govt defends GDP data after ex-FS claims Q1 growth 2.6%",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/02/govt-defends-gdp-data-after-ex-fs-claims-q1-growth-2-6",
  "topic": "finance",
  "section": "Finance & Markets",
  "published": "2026-09-02T22:09:30.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Times of India",
    "slug": "times-of-india",
    "url": "https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/govt-defends-gdp-data-after-ex-fs-claims-q1-growth-2-6/articleshow/133720341.cms"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "The government firmly defended the accuracy of India's GDP data, countering criticism that the figures had been inaccurately revised. Critics had pointed to a downward revision in nominal GDP growth for Q1 FY 2025-26, noting that the base year used to calculate the growth rate had changed. The government explained that the revision was consistent with the new methodology, which incorporated more granular data and a broader range of indicators. The statistics ministry revised the Q1 GDP figure from Rs 86 lakh crore to Rs 80 lakh crore due to the availability of updated production price index (PPI) and index of industrial production (IIP) data. The former finance secretary, Subhash Chandra Garg, had calculated that nominal GDP growth would have been around 2.6% and real GDP growth near 0% if the GDP had not been revised down. Going forward, the government expects only minor revisions to GDP figures, with no substantial changes anticipated.",
  "summary": null,
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 2,
    "also_reported_by": [
      {
        "outlet": "Business Standard IN",
        "title": "Govt asserts no 'mechanical' boost aided Q1FY27 GDP growth print",
        "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/02/govt-asserts-no-mechanical-boost-aided-q1fy27-gdp-growth-print",
        "published": "2026-09-02T18:27:01.000Z"
      }
    ]
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}