We are talking war.While GDP is important in a long race, I see nothing to suggest that China is militarily even remotely as well placed as in 1962. You must remember that India was still in thrall of its non-violent independence struggle & its leaders harboured an idealistic streak about it still. There were almost no addition to Indian military capability from independence to the 1962 war. That isn't the case anymore. India's top fighters are probably better than anything China has & since India has access to a lot of Western equipment which China does not, the next conflict, if it were to happen in the immediate future won't resemble 1962 in the least.
Your GDP is important only if that has means that you have access to better equipments than your adversaries. Since a ban remains in place, the odds are no longer stacked in your favour. A key example would be China failed attempt to obtain Israeli Phalcon AEW & C. India has it, you don't. The balance is not as sharp as you might imagine it to be. As far as destroying cities go( a common line taken by some of your high IQ compatriots), an Indian nuclear bomb is as capable of destroying your economy as China's is of destroying India's. Once that is removed from the equation as being a loony idea, then all that might happen is a short border war & there is no way that you can overwhelm India in such a situation.
Some problems with your analysis:
1.) we have the KJ-2000 with equal detection radius and equal target tracking numbers to the Phalcon. Thanks to Israel for forcing us to make our own later instead of buy instantly. In addition we have domestic production capability for the smaller KJ-200, which, unlike the KJ-2000, is not limited by airframes.
2.) GDP*percentage of GDP that is industry = military production GDP, ours is much bigger than yours. who cares if our engines wear out twice as fast as yours if we can produce one after another. from uniforms to high grade steel to ceramic armor we can produce more weapons. The primary weakness of our engine is the low endurance time, it's actual acceleration and thrust is better than the russian engine. In a real war, we'll just make more backup engines and change them more often.
3.) one of our nukes can deal more megatons of damage than the entire indian arsenal. using nukes is not in your favor.
4.) india might not have been ready but we were actively handicapped. 1962 is the year right after we ended our economic crisis, we lost all support from the USSR, we're still enemies with the US, our soldiers didn't have enough to eat, and we had logistic difficulties because no roads existed in tibet at the time. on the other hand indian forces were near their centers of power, had support of the USSR and acceptance of the US, and had no major economic crisis.
5.) India is disadvantaged by both geography and infrastructure. While it has a global geographical advantage by its capital being closer to the front lines and the bulk of its forces deployed along that line, we have the advantages of mass transport: a train can transport 50000 tons of equipment every day and we have the airlift capability to put 48000 soldiers anywhere in the globe in 48 hours. In addition, we have local geographic advantage: the himalayas make it very very hard for Indian forces to attack us first, which means the choice of attacking is always up to us, not India.
...China is my 
,they r a bunch of clowns who cannot even takeover taiwan,at one side they defend their argument that is is protected by U.S,at other side they say they beat U.S every day
