@Twinblade,
There is a lot of difference between the Baku and Vikramaditya.
Baku was an Aviation Cruiser, and Vikramaditya is a true Aircraft Carrier.
I agree, the Italians would have sold us their AC for about the same cost. The only viable complain about the Baku/Gorshkov/Vikramaditya deal was the delay. There was gross underestimation of the repairs required, because, as you correctly said, it was a rust bucket. Moreover, the Russians offered India a way out of the deal, but India persisted. What no one talks about is that India did ask for major modifications, which were accounted for in the costs.
Had India gotten an AC from Italy, people would have somehow linked that with Sonia Gandhi. You know how it works in India. One can always criticize.
Perhaps that was not a good example, but to add to what
@prohumanity has said, which other country would have leased a nuclear submarine to India? I say none.
Regarding Russia selling arms to PRC, do they have a choice? Arms is one of their major forex earners. Russia was very unhappy with PRC plagiarizing Russian designs, but they have still agreed to sell arms to PRC only because the petulant west and their arrogant leaders have tried to corner Russia into economic isolation. Moreover, India moved away from Russia and started importing arms from the US, with no ToT, Russia needed to sell their arms to someone. At least they did not give away arms as "aid," like Pakistan receives. Therein lies the difference. Russia sells arms to PRC for economic compulsions, but US gives arms tied to "aid," for what?
The details presented by
@prohumanity are not accurate, but the gist of his comment is valid, IMHO.