CAT Questions

Every alternate day question series will be uploaded with past CAT paper Questions

The horizontal bars in the above diagram represent 2020 aggregate sales (in ₹ million) of a company for the different subcategories of its products. The top four product subcategories (Bookcases, Chairs, Furnishings, Tables) belong to furniture product category; the bottom four product subcategories (Accessories, Copiers, Machines, Phones) belong to the technology product category while all other product subcategories belong to the office supply product category. For each of the product subcategories, there is a vertical line indicating the sales of the corresponding subcategory in 2019.


Q1. The total sales (in ₹ million) in 2019 from products in office supplies category is closest to

1.  16.5

2.  12.5

3.  18.0

4.  13.5


Q2. The percentage increase in sales in Furniture category from 2019 to 2020 is closest to

A. 1%

B. 8%




Q3. How many subcategories had sales of ₹ 4 million or more in 2019 and registered an increase in sales in excess of 25% in 2020? (TITA) 1


Q4. The improvement index for a category is the maximum percentage increase in sales from 2019 to 2020 among any of its subcategories. The correct order of categories in increasing order of this improvement index is

A. office supply, technology, furniture

B. technology, furniture, office supply supply, furniture, technology, technology, office supply


Q5. The number of integers n that satisfy the inequalities |n - 60| < |n - 100| < |n - 20| is

1.  21

2.  18

3.  20

4.  19


Q6. Identical chocolate pieces are sold in boxes of two sizes, small and large. The large box is sold for twice the price of the small box. If the selling price per gram of chocolate in the large box is 12% less than that in the small box, then the percentage by which the weight of chocolate in the large box exceeds that in the small box is nearest to

1. 127

2. 135

3. 124

4.  144


The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question.
The sleights of hand that conflate consumption with virtue are a central theme in A Thirst for Empire, a sweeping and richly detailed history of tea by the historian Erika Rappaport. How did tea evolve from an obscure "China drink" to a universal beverage imbued with civilising properties? The answer, in brief, revolves around this conflation, not only by profit-motivated marketers but by a wide variety of interest groups. While abundant historical records have allowed the study of how tea itself moved from east to west, Rappaport is focused on the movement of the idea of tea to suit particular purposes.
Beginning in the 1700s, the temperance movement advocated for tea as a pleasure that cheered but did not inebriate, and industrialists soon borrowed this moral argument in advancing their case for free trade in tea (and hence more open markets for their textiles). Factory owners joined in, compelled by the cause of a sober workforce, while Christian missionaries discovered that tea "would soothe any colonial encounter". During the Second World War, tea service was presented as a social and patriotic activity that uplifted soldiers and calmed refugees.
But it was tea's consumer-directed marketing by importers and retailers “ and later by brands “ that most closely portends current trade debates. An early version of the "farm to table" movement was sparked by anti-Chinese sentiment and concerns over trade deficits, as well as by the reality and threat of adulterated tea containing dirt and hedge clippings. Lipton was soon advertising "from the Garden to Tea Cup" supply chains originating in British India and supervised by "educated Englishmen". While tea marketing always presented direct consumer benefits (health, energy, relaxation), tea drinkers were also assured that they were participating in a larger noble project that advanced the causes of family, nation and civilization. . . .
Rappaport's treatment of her subject is refreshingly apolitical. Indeed, it is a virtue that readers will be unable to guess her political orientation: both the miracle of markets and capitalism's dark underbelly are evident in tea's complex story, as are the complicated effects of British colonialism. . . . Commodity histories are now themselves commodities: recent works investigate cotton, salt, cod, sugar, chocolate, paper and milk. And morality marketing is now a commodity as well, applied to food, "fair trade" apparel and eco-tourism. Yet tea is, Rappaport makes clear, a world apart “ an astonishing success story in which tea marketers not only succeeded in conveying a sense of moral elevation to the consumer but also arguably did advance the cause of civilisation and community.
I have been offered tea at a British garden party, a Bedouin campfire, a Turkish carpet shop and a Japanese chashitsu, to name a few settings. In each case the offering was more an idea “ friendship, community, respect “ than a drink, and in each case the idea then created a reality. It is not a stretch to say that tea marketers have advanced the particularly noble cause of human dialogue and friendship.


Q7. The author of this book review is LEAST likely to support the view that:

A. tea drinking was sometimes promoted as a patriotic duty.

B. the ritual of drinking tea promotes congeniality and camaraderie.

C.tea drinking has become a social ritual worldwide.

D.tea became the leading drink in Britain in the nineteenth century.


Q8. This book review argues that, according to Rappaport, tea is unlike other "morality" products because it:

A. appealed to a universal group and not just to a niche section of people.

B. had an actual beneficial effect on social interaction and society in general.

C.was actively encouraged by interest groups in the government.

D.was marketed by a wide range of interest groups.


Q9. According to this book review, A Thirst for Empire says that, in addition to "profit-motivated marketers", tea drinking was promoted in Britain by all of the following EXCEPT:

A. factories to instill sobriety in their labour.

B. tea drinkers lobbying for product diversity.

C.manufacturers who were pressing for duty-free imports.

D.the anti-alcohol lobby as a substitute for the consumption of liquor.


Q10. Today, "conflat[ing] consumption with virtue" can be seen in the marketing of:

A. sustainably farmed foods.

B. ergonomically designed products. to pristine destinations.

D.natural health supplements.


Q11. The number of ways of distributing 15 identical balloons, 6 identical pencils and 3 identical erasers among 3 children, such that each child gets at least four balloons and one pencil, is (TITA) 1000


Q12. Q3. Consider the pair of equations: x2 - xy - x = 22 and y2 - xy + y = 34. If x > y, then x - y equals

1.  8

2.  6

3.  7

4.  4



It has been said that knowledge, or the problem of knowledge, is the scandal of philosophy. The scandal is philosophy's apparent inability to show how, when and why we can be sure that we know something or, indeed, that we know anything. Philosopher Michael Williams writes: 'Is it possible to obtain knowledge at all? This problem is pressing because there are powerful arguments, some very ancient, for the conclusion that it is not . . . Scepticism is the skeleton in Western rationalism's closet'. While it is not clear that the scandal matters to anyone but philosophers, philosophers point out that it should matter to everyone, at least given a certain conception of knowledge. For, they explain, unless we can ground our claims to knowledge as such, which is to say, distinguish it from mere opinion, superstition, fantasy, wishful thinking, ideology, illusion or delusion, then the actions we take on the basis of presumed knowledge – boarding an airplane, swallowing a pill, finding someone guilty of a crime – will be irrational and unjustifiable.
That is all quite serious-sounding but so also are the rattlings of the skeleton: that is, the sceptic's contention that we cannot be sure that we know anything – at least not if we think of knowledge as something like having a correct mental representation of reality, and not if we think of reality as something like things-as-they-are-in-themselves, independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions. For, the sceptic will note, since reality, under that conception of it, is outside our ken (we cannot catch a glimpse of things-in-themselves around the corner of our own eyes; we cannot form an idea of reality that floats above the processes of our conceiving it), we have no way to compare our mental representations with things-as-they-are-in-themselves and therefore no way to determine whether they are correct or incorrect. Thus the sceptic may repeat (rattling loudly), you cannot be sure you 'know' something or anything at all – at least not, he may add (rattling softly before disappearing), if that is the way you conceive 'knowledge'.
There are a number of ways to handle this situation. The most common is to ignore it. Most people outside the academy – and, indeed, most of us inside it – are unaware of or unperturbed by the philosophical scandal of knowledge and go about our lives without too many epistemic anxieties. We hold our beliefs and presumptive knowledges more or less confidently, usually depending on how we acquired them (I saw it with my own eyes; I heard it on Fox News; a guy at the office told me) and how broadly and strenuously they seem to be shared or endorsed by various relevant people: experts and authorities, friends and family members, colleagues and associates. And we examine our convictions more or less closely, explain them more or less extensively, and defend them more or less vigorously, usually depending on what seems to be at stake for ourselves and/or other people and what resources are available for reassuring ourselves or making our beliefs credible to others (look, it's right here on the page; add up the figures yourself; I happen to be a heart specialist).


Q13. The author of the passage is most likely to support which one of the following statements?

A. The confidence with which we maintain something to be true is usually independent of the source of the alleged truth.

B. The actions taken on the basis of presumed knowledge are rational and justifiable if we are confident that that knowledge is widely held.

C.The scandal of philosophy is that we might not know anything at all about reality if we think of reality as independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions.

D.For the sceptic, if we think of reality as independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions, we should aim to know that reality independently too.


Q14. ". . . we cannot catch a glimpse of things-in-themselves around the corner of our own eyes; we cannot form an idea of reality that floats above the processes of our conceiving it . . ." Which one of the following statements best reflects the argument being made in this sentence?

A. Our knowledge of reality cannot be merged with our process of conceiving it.

B. If the reality of things is independent of our perception, logically we cannot perceive that reality.

C.If the reality of things is independent of our eyesight, logically we cannot perceive our perception.

D.Our knowledge of reality floats above our subjective perception of it.


Q15. According to the last paragraph of the passage, "We hold our beliefs and presumptive knowledges more or less confidently, usually depending on" something. Which one of the following most broadly captures what we depend on?

A. All of the options listed here.

B. How much of a stake we have in them; what resources there are to support them.

C.Remaining outside the academy; ignoring epistemic anxieties.

D.How we come to hold them; how widely they are held in our social circles.


Q16. The author discusses all of the following arguments in the passage, EXCEPT:

A. if we cannot distinguish knowledge from opinion or delusion, we will not be able to justify our actions.

B. the best way to deal with scepticism about the veracity of knowledge is to ignore it.

C.philosophers maintain that the scandal of philosophy should be of concern to everyone.

D.sceptics believe that we can never fully know anything, if by "knowing" we mean knowledge of a reality that is independent of the knower.


Q17. If a certain weight of an alloy of silver and copper is mixed with 3 kg of pure silver, the resulting alloy will have 90% silver by weight. If the same weight of the initial alloy is mixed with 2 kg of another alloy which has 90% silver by weight, the resulting alloy will have 84% silver by weight. Then, the weight of the initial alloy, in kg, is

1.  3

2.  2.5

3.  4

4.  3.5


Q18. Anil can paint a house in 12 days while Barun can paint it in 16 days. Anil, Barun, and Chandu undertake to paint the house for ₹ 24000 and the three of them together complete the painting in 6 days. If Chandu is paid in proportion to the work done by him, then the amount in INR received by him is (TITA) 3000


Q19-22. Ten objects o1, o2, …, o10 were distributed among Amar, Barat, Charles, Disha, and Elise. Each item went to exactly one person. Each person got exactly two of the items, and this pair of objects is called her/his bundle.

The following table shows how each person values each object. 

The value of any bundle by a person is the sum of that person's values of the objects in that bundle. A person X envies another person Y if X values Y's bundle more than X's own bundle. 
For example, hypothetically suppose Amar's bundle consists of o1 and o2, and Barat's bundle consists of o3 and o4. Then Amar values his own bundle at 4 + 9 = 13 and Barat's bundle at 9 + 3 = 12. Hence Amar does not envy Barat. On the other hand, Barat values his own bundle at 7 + 5 = 12 and Amar's bundle at 5 + 9 = 14. Hence Barat envies Amar.
iThe following facts are known about the actual distribution of the objects among the five people.
1. If someone's value for an object is 10, then she/he received that object.
2. Objects o1, o2, and o3 were given to three different people. 
3. Objects o1 and o8 were given to different people.
4. Three people value their own bundles at 16. No one values iher/his own bundle at a number higher than 16.
5. Disha values her own bundle at an odd number. All others value their own bundles at an even number.
6. Some people who value their own bundles less than 16 envy some other people who value their own bundle at 16. No one else envies others.


Q19. What BEST can be said about object o8?

A. o8 was given to Disha

B. o8 was given to Amar, Charles, or Disha

C.o8 was given to Charles or Disha 

iiD.o8 was given to Charles


Q20. Who among the following envies someone else?

A. Amar

B. Barat




Q21. What is Amar's value for his own bundle? (TITA) 12


Q22. Object o4 was given to









Q1- 4

Q2 – 2

Q3 – [1]

Q4 - 4

Q5 - 4

Q6 - 1

Q7 - 4

Q8 - 2

Q9 - 2

Q10 - 1

Q11 – [1000]

Q12 - 1

Q13 - 3

Q14 - 2

Q15 - 4

Q16 - 2

Q17 - 3

Q18 – [3000]

Q19 - 4

Q20 - 1

Q21 – [12]

Q22 - 1


Join the best classroom coaching for MBA Entrance Exams in Mumbai


CAT 2022




Let's Talk about Your Career

Call Us


Mail Address

[email protected]

Our Location

Civic Centre, 104, 1st floor, MMGS Marg, opp. Kailash Lassi Wala, Dadar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400014