Long time lurker, first time poster. I've been mulling over this one and I think it's a combination of factors.
1. As stephen mentioned, without being better than Indian teams of the past particularly in the batting department, this team just seems more balanced and better equipped to deal, particularly in the face of adversity. The lower order is more than a handful with the bat (remember how useless the 90s and 00s teams mostly were once the keeper got out?) and are regularly adding in 50 and 100 run partnerships at rapid rates.
The bowling - the bowlers seem to be able to squeeze the opposition out of the game and put immense pressure on the other team, and capitalise on big scores by the batsmen. When the batsmen don't produce, the bowlers are capable of taking the 20 wickets required to win a match. That legendary Indian batting lineup was wasted, because for the most part, the bowling line up couldn't take 20 wickets.
Of course, we'll see the real test once this team tours abroad as for the best part, they've performed at home so far.
2. There's no truly 'great' team around at the moment so it's all a bit relative. There's no 90s/00s Australia, Sri Lanka have gone off a cliff, West Indies went off it long ago, England aren't as good as before (but have potential), Pakistan are inconsitent, and after dominating in the early 2010s, South Africa seem to be in a bit of a lull too.