What is the Difference between AS 29 and Ind AS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets
Ind AS 37 is based on the current IAS 37. The major differences between IAS 37 and AS 29 are described hereinafter. Difference due to level of preparedness AS 29 requires that the amount of a provision should not be discounted to its present value since financial statements in India are prepared generally on historical cost basis and not on present value basis. However a limited revision is being proposed to bring it in line with IAS 39 insofar as this aspect is concerned. Conceptual Differences IAS 37 deals with ‘constructive obligation’ in the context of creation of a provision. The effect of recognising provision on the basis of constructive obligation is that, in some cases, provision will be required to be recognised at an early stage. For example, in case of a restructuring, a constructive obligation arises when an enterprise has a detailed formal plan for the restructuring and the enterprise has raised a valid expectation in those affected that it will carry out the restructuring by starting to implement that plan or announcing its main features to those affected by it. It is felt that merely on the basis of a detailed formal plan and announcement thereof, it would not be appropriate to recognise a provision since a liability cannot be considered to be crystalised at this stage. Further, the judgment whether the management has raised valid expectations in those affected may be a matter of considerable argument.
(i) Unlike the existing AS 29, Ind AS 37 requires creation of provisions in respect of constructive obligations also. [However, the existing standard requires creation of provisions arising out of normal business practices, custom and a desire to maintain good business relations or to act in an equitable manner]. This has resulted in some consequential changes also. For example, definition of provision and obligating event have been revised in Ind AS 37, while the terms ‘legal obligation’ and ‘constructive obligation’ have been inserted and defined in Ind AS 37. Similarly, the portion of existing AS 29 pertaining to restructuring provisions has been revised in Ind AS 37. Additional examples have also been included in Appendices F and G of Ind AS 37. (ii) The existing AS 29 prohibits discounting the amounts of provisions. Ind AS 37 requires discounting the amounts of provisions, if effect of the time value of money is material. (iii) The existing AS 29 notes the practice of disclosure of contingent assets in the report of the approving authority but prohibits disclosure of the same in the financial statements. Ind AS 37 requires disclosure of contingent assets in the financial statements when the inflow of economic benefits is probable. The disclosure, however, should avoid misleading indications of the likelihood of income arising. (iv) Ind AS 37 makes it clear that before a separate provision for an onerous contract is established, an entity should recognise any impairment loss that has occurred on assets dedicated to that contract in accordance with Ind AS 36. There is no such specific provision in the existing standard. (v) The existing AS 29 states that identifiable future operating losses up to the date of restructuring are not included in a provision. Ind AS 37 gives an exception to this principle viz. such losses related to an onerous contract. (vi) Ind AS 37 gives guidance on (i) Rights to Interests arising from Decommissioning, Restoration and Environmental Rehabilitation Funds and (ii) Liabilities arising from Participating in a Specific Market— Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment. Source : www.icai.org