CA.

JAI CHAWLA
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS OF CA FINAL FR BY CA JAI
CHAWLA SIR

IND AS 8

Question 1 (Illustration 2 of ICAI Module)

Change in classification of asset:
Entity ABC acquired a building for its administrative purposes and presented the same as property, plant
and equipment (PPE) in the financial year 20X1-20X2. During the financial year 20X2-20X3, it relocated
the office to a new building and leased the said building to a third party. Following the change in the usage
of the building, Entity ABC reclassified it from PPE to investment property in the financial year 20X2-
20X3. Should Entity ABC account for the change as a change in accounting policy?
Solution
Paragraph 16(a) of Ind AS 8 provides that the application of an accounting policy for transactions, other
events or conditions that differ in substance from those previously occurring are not changes in
accounting policies.
As per Ind AS 16, “property, plant and equipment” are tangible items that:
a) are held for use in the production or supply of goods or services, for rental to others, or for
administrative purposes; and
b) are expected to be used during more than one period.
As per Ind AS 40, “investment property” is property (land or a building—or part of a building—or both)
held (by the owner or by the lessee as a right-of-use asset) to earn rentals or for capital appreciation or
both, rather than for:
a) use in the production or supply of goods or services or for administrative purposes; or
b) sale in the ordinary course of business.
As per the above definitions, whether a building is an item of property, plant and equipment (PPE) or an
investment property for an entity depends on the purpose for which it is held by the entity. It is thus
possible that due to a change in the purpose for which it is held, a building that was previously classified
as an item of property, plant and equipment may warrant reclassification as an investment property, or
vice versa. Whether a building is in the nature of PPE or investment property is determined by applying
the definitions of these terms from the perspective of that entity. Thus, the classification of a building
as an item of property, plant and equipment or as an investment property is not a matter of an accounting
policy choice.
Accordingly, a change in classification of a building from property, plant and equipment to investment
property due to change in the purpose for which it is held by the entity is not a change in an accounting
policy.

Question 2 (Question 3 of ICAI Module)

Prepare extracts on notes:

ICAI’s MOST LOVED IMPORTANT QUESTIONS 1

 CA. JAI CHAWLA
During 20X2, Delta Ltd., changed its accounting policy for depreciating property, plant and equipment, so
as to apply much more fully a components approach, whilst at the same time adopting the revaluation
model.
In years before 20X2, Delta Ltd.’s asset records were not sufficiently detailed to apply a component
approach fully. At the end of 20X1, management commissioned an engineering survey, which provided
information on the components held and their fair values, useful lives, estimated residual values and
depreciable amounts at the beginning of 20X2. However, the survey did not provide a sufficient basis for
reliably estimating the cost of those components that had not previously been accounted for separately,
and the existing records before the survey did not permit this information to be reconstructed.
Delta Ltd.’s management considered how to account for each of the two aspects of the accounting change.
They determined that it was not practicable to account for the change to a fuller-components approach
retrospectively, or to account for that change prospectively from any earlier date than the start of 20X2.
Also, the change from a cost model to a revaluation model is required to be accounted for prospectively.
Therefore, management concluded that it should apply Delta Ltd.’s new policy prospectively from the start
of 20X2.

Additional information:
i) Delta Ltd.’s tax rate is 30%
ii) Property, plant and equipment at the end of 20X1:
Cost Rs. 25,000
Depreciation Rs. 14,000
Net book value Rs. 11,000
iii) Prospective depreciation expense for 20X2 (old basis) Rs. 1,500
iv) Some results of the engineering survey:
Valuation Rs. 17,000
Estimated residual value Rs. 3,000
Average remaining asset life 7 years
Depreciation expense on existing property, plant and equipment
for 20X2 (new basis) Rs. 2,000

You are required to prepare relevant note for disclosure in accordance with Ind AS 8.
Solution:
Extract from the notes
From the start of 20X2, Delta Ltd., changed its accounting policy for depreciating property, plant and
equipment, so as to apply much more fully a components approach, whilst at the same time adopting the
revaluation model. Management takes the view that this policy provides reliable and more relevant
information because it deals more accurately with the components of property, plant and equipment and is
based on up-to-date values. The policy has been applied prospectively from the start of 20X2 because it
was not practicable to estimate the effects of applying the policy either retrospectively, or prospectively
from any earlier date. Accordingly, the adoption of the new policy has no effect on prior years. The effect
on the current year is to increase the carrying amount of property, plant and equipment at the start of
the year by Rs. 6,000; increase the opening deferred tax provision by Rs. 1,800; create a revaluation
surplus at the start of the year of Rs. 4,200; increase depreciation expense by Rs. 500; and reduce tax
expense by Rs. 150.

ICAI’s MOST LOVED IMPORTANT QUESTIONS 2

 CA. JAI CHAWLA

Question 3 (Question 5 of ICAI Module)

Error in the previous year:
An entity charged off certain expenses as finance costs in its financial statements for the year ended
31st March, 20X1. While preparing annual financial statements for the year ended 31st March, 20X2,
management discovered that these expenses should have been classified as other expenses instead of
finance costs. The error occurred because the management inadvertently misinterpreted certain facts.
The entity intends to restate the comparative amounts for the prior period presented in which the error
occurred (i.e, year
ended 31st March, 20X1). Would this reclassification of expenses from finance costs to other expenses in
the comparative amounts will be considered as correction of an error under Ind AS 8? Would the entity
need to present a third balance sheet?
Solution:
As per paragraph 41 of Ind AS 8, errors can arise in respect of the recognition, measurement,
presentation or disclosure of elements of financial statements. Financial statements do not comply with
Ind AS if they contain either material errors or immaterial errors made intentionally to achieve a
particular presentation of an entity’s financial position, financial performance or cash flows. Potential
current period errors discovered in
that period are corrected before the financial statements are approved for issue. However, material
errors are sometimes not discovered until a subsequent period, and these prior period errors are
corrected in the comparative information presented in the financial statements for that subsequent
period.
In accordance with the above, the reclassification of expenses from finance costs to other expenses
would be considered as correction of an error under Ind AS 8. Accordingly, in the financial statements for
the year ended 31st March, 20X2, the comparative amounts for the year ended 31st March, 20X1 would
be restated to reflect the correct classification.
Ind AS 1 requires an entity to present a third balance sheet as at the beginning of the preceding period in
addition to the minimum comparative financial statements if, inter alia, it makes a retrospective
restatement of items in its financial statements a nd the restatement has a material effect on the
information in the balance sheet at the beginning of the preceding period.
In the given case, the retrospective restatement of relevant items in statement of profit and loss has no
effect on the information in the balance sheet at the beginning of the preceding period (1st April, 20X0).
Therefore, the entity is not required to present a third balance sheet.

Question 4 (Question 9 ICAI Module)

Change in method of valuation of inventory:
ABC Ltd. changed its method adopted for inventory valuation in the year 20X2-20X3. Prior to the change,
inventory was valued using the first in first out method (FIFO). However, it was felt that in order to
match current practice and to make the financial statements more relevant and reliable, a weighted
average valuation model would be more appropriate.
The effect of the change in the method of valuation of inventory was as follows:
• 31st March, 20X1 - Increase of Rs. 10 million

ICAI’s MOST LOVED IMPORTANT QUESTIONS 3

 CA. JAI CHAWLA
• 31st March, 20X2 - Increase of Rs. 15 million
• 31st March, 20X3 - Increase of Rs. 20 million
Profit or loss under the FIFO valuation model are as follows:
20X2-20X3 20X1-20X2
Revenue 324 296
Cost of goods sold (173) (164)
Gross profit 151 132
Expenses (83) (74)
Profit 68 58
Retained earnings at 31st March, 20X1 were Rs. 423 million
Present the change in accounting policy in the profit or loss and produce an extract of the statement of
changes in equity in accordance with Ind AS 8.
Solution:
Profit or loss under weighted average valuation method is as follows:
20X2-20X3 20X1-20X2
(Restated)
Revenue 324 296
Cost of goods sold (168) (159)
Gross profit 159 137
Expenses (83) (74)
Profit 73 63
Statement of changes in Equity (extract)
Retained Retained earnings
earnings (Original)

At 1st April, 20X1 423 423

Change in inventory valuation policy 10 -
At 1st April, 20X1 (Restated) 433 -
Profit for the year 20X1-20X2 63 58
At 31st March, 20X2 496 481
Profit for the 20X2-20X3 73 68
At 31st March, 20X3 569 549

ICAI’s MOST LOVED IMPORTANT QUESTIONS 4