But it does have to do with your comment:
Your implied comparison being of the Mughal Empire and 15th century Britain. Thus my response. Also, for more on the GDPs thing see
here.
I was referring solely to the political situation.
I think you're missing the point.
To put it crudely there is a difference between solid advancement for your own benefit and clawing your way up despite colonial exploitation. India was held back by the BEIC, via de-industrialisation and so on, and without that might have advanced faster (or not, of course, but that's AH for you). The fact that it advanced at all was despite, not because of, that. Is it a fair comparison to compare a region being developed for its own advantage to one being developed (or otherwise) for the advantage of rulers elsewhere? I would say not.
You're missing the details of British politics of the time a little bit.
The EIC were in Britain solely for profit, that is without a doubt. However Britain was a very modern country.
Imagine the outcry today if one of our companies started exploiting 3rd world countries to such an extent. Back then it was the same if not even moreso.
Left up to the EIC India would have just been a place to rape and take advantage of as the Indian nationalists would have us believe happened. The British government however couldn't let this happen and they worked to activly improve India whilst money was being made there.
The British Empire was largely founded for two reasons: 1: To protect British buisnses, 2: To protect people from British buisness. It allowed the world to progress into the capitalist era without being totally screwed over by it.
The ultimate goal for India was always to develop up to modern levels and become a self-governing liberal democracy peacefully trading with the rest of the civilized world for mututal gain.
De-industrialisation: it really was not a big deal at all. It wasn't anything like so dramatic as many would make out. It was just buisness. Like today if a car company shuts down its factory in Britain because its cheaper to make things in China. It was the same only in reverse. That's capitalism.
Any suggestion of a united India escaping European domination, doing a Japan and becoming a world power is just...argh! Its right up there with America winning 1812 then going on to conquer the world or a independant Ireland becoming a world power.
I could well see a few parts of India perhaps managing to prosper without foreign take over (hard to achieve in itself). but the 'country' as a whole? China is far a better comparison for what would happen than Japan.