Statement: Should import duty on all the electronic goods be dispensed with?…

Concept: In Statement-and-Argument reasoning, an argument is judged "strong" only when it is (a) directly related to the statement and (b) addresses a real, important, and decisive aspect of the proposed action — its genuine practical merits or harms. An argument that is only superficially true, or that raises a comparatively minor, indirect, or easily-offset consideration, is "weak", however factually correct it may sound.

Application: Testing both given arguments against this standard.

Argument II says local manufacturers would be unable to compete with technologically far superior foreign firms once the duty is removed. This is a direct, serious, and directly relevant consequence of the exact policy proposed — the domestic electronics industry losing its ability to hold its ground against foreign competition — so it is strong.

Argument I says government revenue would fall and development would suffer. Although lifting a duty does reduce that revenue, this is an indirect, general fiscal concern that a government can offset from other sources; it points to a secondary budgetary side-effect rather than to any decisive practical harm of the policy itself, so it is not a convincing, strong argument.

Cross-check: The decisive question the statement raises is whether abolishing the duty would harm the domestic electronics sector. Argument II speaks directly to that harm, while Argument I only points to a secondary budgetary effect. Hence only Argument II is strong.