Page |1

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Sr. No. Particulars Page. No.

1. Executive Summary 2.

2. Introduction 4.

3. Objectives and Research 7.

Methodology

4. The Categorization made by 8.

the ICAI

5. Impact Of IFRS 9.
convergence on Accounting
Practices

6. Text Of Relevant IFRS 12.

7. Comparison of IFRS and 18.

Indian Accounting
Standards

8. Findings And Conclusion 21.

9. Bibliography 24.
 Page |2

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Executive Summary

International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRS, is the collection of financial reporting

standards developed by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), an independent,
international standard setting organization. The aim of IFRS is to provide "a single set of high
quality, global accounting standards that require transparent and comparable information in
general purpose financial statements.". From 1973 to 2001, IAS were issued by the International
Accounting Standards Committee (IASC). In April 2001 the International Accounting Standards
Board (IASB) adopted all IAS and began developing new standards called IFRS. It is noteworthy
that an IAS remains in effect unless replaced by an IFRS. In line of Global Trend, the ICAI
has proposed a plan for convergence with IFRS for listed entities, Banks, Insurance etc. with
effect from accounting period commence on or after 1st April 2011. Large Scale entities defined
as entities with turnover in excess of Rs.1 Billion or borrowing in excess of Rs.250 Million. For
Other ‘small and medium sized entities’ (SMEs)), a separate standard for SMEs may be
formulated based on the IFRS for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises when finally issued by
the IASB, after modifications, if necessary.

Transparent financial information plays a key role in maintaining market confidence, improving
markets’ efficiency by allowing investors to identify risks in a timely manner, contributing to
financial stability and is a pre-requisite in creating premises for sound economic growth. As an
effect of market turbulences resulting from the financial crisis, transparency and comparability of
the financial statements of financial institutions have gained increased importance for market
participants. In this context, ESMA has intensified its reviewing activities, with an increased
focus on the financial statements of financial institutions and together with EBA and ESRB has
undertaken further initiatives to improve the level of confidence in the financial sector by asking
financial institutions to provide better disclosure of financial and risk information in financial
reporting.

Overall ESMA found that disclosures specifically covered by the requirements of IFRS 7 –
Financial Instruments: Disclosures were generally provided and acknowledges the efforts made
by financial institutions to improve the quality of their financial statements. Yet, ESMA
observed a wide variability in the quality of the information provided and identified some cases
 Page |3

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

where the information provided was not sufficient or not sufficiently structured to allow
comparability among financial institutions. Some financial institutions provided disclosures that
were not specific enough, lacked links between quantitative and narrative information, or
provided disclosures that could not be reconciled to the primary financial statements. ESMA
urges issuers to take a step back and consider the overall objectives of IFRS 7 against their
specific circumstances when preparing disclosures.

When information was provided outside financial statements (e.g. in a risk report or business
review), in some cases it was unclear whether it was incorporated by reference. In general, users
of financial information would benefit if the information provided in different sections of the
financial report were linked to each other and if information provided across these reports was
consistent or major differences in bases used to provide this information were explained.
 Page |4

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Introduction

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has announced that IFRS will be
mandatory in India for financial statements for the periods beginning on or after 1 April 2012.
This will be done by revising existing accounting standards to make them compatible with IFRS.

Reserve Bank of India has stated that the financial statements of banks need to be IFRS-
compliant for periods beginning on or after 1 April 2011.

The ICAI has also stated that IFRS will be applied to companies above INR 1000 crore (INR 10
billion) from April 2011. Phase wise applicability details for different companies in India:

 Phase 1: Opening balance sheet as at 1 April 2011*

i. Companies which are part of NSE Index – Nifty 50
ii. Companies which are part of BSE Sensex – BSE 30
 Companies whose shares or other securities are listed on a stock exchange outside India
 Companies, whether listed or not, having a net worth of more than INR 1000 crore (INR
10 billion)
 Phase 2: Opening balance sheet as at 1 April 2012*

Companies not covered in phase 1 and having a net worth exceeding INR 500 crore (INR 5
billion)

 Phase 3: Opening balance sheet as at 1 April 2014*

Listed companies not covered in the earlier phases * If the financial year of a company
commences at a date other than 1 April, then it shall prepare its opening balance sheet at the
commencement of immediately following financial year.

On January 22, 2010, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs issued the road map for transition to
IFRS. It is clear that India has deferred transition to IFRS by a year. In the first phase, companies
included in Nifty 50 or BSE Sensex, and companies whose securities are listed on stock
exchanges outside India and all other companies having net worth of INR 1000 crore will
prepare and present financial statements using Indian Accounting Standards converged with
IFRS. According to the press note issued by the government, those companies will convert their
 Page |5

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

first balance sheet as at April 1, 2011, applying accounting standards convergent with IFRS if the
accounting year ends on March 31. This implies that the transition date will be April 1, 2011.
According to the earlier plan, the transition date was fixed at April 1, 2010.

The press note does not clarify whether the full set of financial statements for the year 2011–12
will be prepared by applying accounting standards convergent with IFRS. The deferment of the
transition may make companies happy, but it will undermine India's position. Presumably, lack
of preparedness of Indian companies has led to the decision to defer the adoption of IFRS for a
year. This is unfortunate that India, which boasts for its IT and accounting skills, could not
prepare itself for the transition to IFRS over last four years. But that might be the ground reality.
Transition in phases Companies, whether listed or not, having a net worth of more than INR 500
crore will convert their opening balance sheet as at April 1, 2013. Listed companies having net
worth of INR 500 crore or less will convert their opening balance sheet as at April 1, 2014. Un-
listed companies having net worth of Rs 500 crore or less will continue to apply existing
accounting standards, which might be modified from time to time. The transition to IFRS in
phases is a smart move. The transition cost for smaller companies will be much lower because
large companies will bear the initial cost of learning and smaller companies will not be required
to reinvent the wheel. However, this will happen only if a significant number of large companies
engage Indian accounting firms to provide them support in their transition to IFRS. If, most large
companies, which will comply with Indian accounting standards convergent with IFRS in the
first phase, choose one of the international firms, Indian accounting firms and smaller companies
will not benefit from the learning in the first phase of the transition to IFRS. It is likely that
international firms will protect their learning to retain their competitive advantage. Therefore, it
is for the benefit of the country that each company makes judicious choice of the accounting firm
as its partner without limiting its choice to international accounting firms. Public sector
companies should take the lead and the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) should
develop a clear strategy to diffuse the learning. Size of companies The government has decided
to measure the size of companies in terms of net worth. This is not the ideal unit to measure the
size of a company. Net worth in the balance sheet is determined by accounting principles and
methods. Therefore, it does not include the value of intangible assets. Moreover, as most assets
 Page |6

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

and liabilities are measured at historical cost, the net worth does not reflect the current value of
those assets and liabilities. Market capitalization is a better measure of the size of a company.
But it is difficult to estimate market capitalization or fundamental value of unlisted companies.
This might be the reason that the government has decided to use 'net worth' to measure the size
of companies. Some companies, which are large in terms of fundamental value or which intend
to attract foreign capital, might prefer to use Indian accounting standards convergent with IFRS
earlier than required under the road map presented by the government. The government should
provide that choice.
 Page |7

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Objectives of the study and Research methodology

The main objective of this research project is to obtain an understanding of how the IFRS have
brought in a change in the general accounting, presentation and recognization and disclosure
scenarios in the world of accounting and finance, especially with it’s special reference and effect
on the Indian scenario of finance, accounting, presentation and auditing.

Therefore, there arises a need to have an overall understanding of the effect of the previous
Indian accounting standards, issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), on
the accounting, presentation and disclosure scenarios, in the country. Once the relevant standards
are understood and their effects grasped, an attempt can then be made to throw some light on
how those very effects have been modified by the introduction and subsequent substitution of
the IFRS in place of the Indian Accounting Standards.

Hence, in this project, the methodology that is followed is quite simple –

First, we will understand how the IFRS function, its history and its governing bodies.

Thereafter, we will make an attempt to review the effects of the Indian Standards and the
relevant corresponding IFRS, thereby also understanding the previous and the current effects.

Therefore, in a nutshell, we will understand what IFRS are, and how different do they function
from the Indian AS’, after which we will present our findings and conclusions.
 Page |8

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Catergorization of IFRS made by the ICAI

As part of its convergence strategy, the ICAI has classified IFRS into the following broad

categories :

CategoryI : IFRSwhich can be adopted immediately or in the immediate future in view of no or

minor differences (for example, construction contracts, borrowing costs, inventories).

Category II : IFRS which may require some time to reach a level of technical preparedness by
the industry and professionals, keeping in view the existing economic environment and other
factors (for example, share-based payments).

CategoryIII :IFRSwhich have conceptualdifferences with the corresponding Indian Accounting

Standards and where further dialogue and discussions with the IASBmay be required
(consolidation, associates,joint ventures, provisionsand contingent liabilities).

CategoryIV : IFRS,the adoption of which would require changes in laws/regulations because

compliance with such IFRS is not possible until the regulations/laws are amended (for example,
accounting policies and errors, property and equipment, first-time adoption of IFRS).
 Page |9

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Impact of IFRS convergence on fundamental

accounting practices:

Harmonising existing Indian accounting standards with IFRS will have an impact on some
fundamental accounting practices followed in India. A few of these are enumerated below :

Use of fair value concept:

Indian GAAP requires financial statements to be prepared on historical cost except for fixed
assets which could be selectively revalued. Use of fair value is presently limited for testing of
impairment of assets, measurement of retirement benefits and 'mark-to-market' accounting for
derivatives. Under IFRS, there is a growing emphasis on fair value.

Substance over form :

Considering the overall theme of substance over form, IFRS mandates preparation of
consolidated financial statements to reflect the true picture of the net worth to various
stakeholders. Exceptions for preparation of consolidated financial statements are very limited. In
India, currently consolidated financial statements are mandatory only for listed companies and
that also only for the annual fincmcial statements and not the interim financial statements.
Similarly, Indian accounting continues to be driven by the written contract and the form of the
transaction - as opposed to the substance. Consider, up front fees charged by a telecom service
provider. Under Indian GAAP, several companies recognise such upfront fees as income because
it is contractually non-refundable and is contractually received as fees for the activation process.
Under IFRS, the fee is accounted for in accordance with the substance of the transaction. Under
this approach, the customer pays the upfront activation fee not for any service received by the
customer, but in anticipation of the future services from the telecom company. Thus, despite the
non-refundable nature of the fees, revenue recognition would be deferred over the estimated
period that telecom services will be provided to the customer.
 P a g e | 10

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Exceptional and extraordinary items:

Indian GAAP requires companies to disclose significant events which are not in the ordinary
course of business as extraordinary items and material items as exceptional to facilitate the
reader to consider the impact of these items on the reported performance. Under IFRS there is no
concept of extraordinary or exceptional since all events/transactions are in the normal course of
business and if an item is material, it can be disclosed separately, but cannot be termed as
'extraordinary' or 'exceptional'.

Restatement of financial statements:

Under Indian GAAP, changes in accounting policies or rectification of errors (prior period items)
are recognised in the current year's profit and loss account (for errors) and are generally
recognised prospectively (for changes in accounting policies). Under IFRS, the prior period
comparatives are restated in both cases. Indian GAAP does not have the concept of restatement
of comparatives except in case of special-purpose financial statements prepared for public
offering of securities.

Determination of functional currency:

Entities in India prepare their general purpose financial statements in Indian rupees. However
under IFRS, an entity measures its assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses in its functional
currency, which is the currency that best reflects the economic substance of the underlying
events and circumstances relevant to the entity i.e.,the currency of the prim<ll1: economic
environment in which the entity operat~: Functional currency of an entity may be different from
the local currency. For example, consider an Indian entity operating in the shipping industry. For
such an entity it is possible that a significant portion of revenues may be derived in foreign
currencies, pricing is determined by global factors, assets are routinely acquired from outside
India and borrowings may be in foreign currencies. All these factors need to be considered to
determine whether the Indian rupee is indeed the functional currency or whether another foreign
currency better reflects the economic environment that most impacts the entity.
 P a g e | 11

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Other significant aspects :

Under Indian GAAP, provision has to be made for proposed dividend, although it may be
declared by the entity and approved by the shareholders after the balance sheet date. Under
IFRS, dividends that are proposed or declared after the balance sheet date are not recognised as
liability at the balance sheet date. Proposed dividend is a non-adjusting event and is recorded as a
liability in the period in which it is declared and approved.
 P a g e | 12

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Text of Relevant IFRS’

IFRS 5 — Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations

IFRS 5 Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations outlines how to account
for non-current assets held for sale (or for distribution to owners). In general terms, assets (or
disposal groups) held for sale are not depreciated, are measured at the lower of carrying amount
and fair value less costs to sell, and are presented separately in the balance sheet. Specific
disclosures are also required for discontinued operations and disposals of non-current assets.
IFRS 5 was issued in March 2004 and applies to annual periods beginning on or after 1 January
2005.

History of IFRS 5

September 2002 Project added to IASB agenda

24 July 2003 Exposure Draft ED 4 Disposal of Non-current Assets and Presentation of

Discontinued Operations

31 March 2004 IFRS 5 Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued
OperationsClick for Press Release on IFRS 5 (PDF 32k).

1 January 2005 Effective date of IFRS 5

22 May 2008 IFRS 5 amended for Annual Improvements to IFRSs 2007 about sale of a
controlling interest in the subsidiary

November 2008 Consequential amendments from IFRIC 17 Distributions of Non-cash

Assets to Owners

1 July 2009 Effective date of May and November 2008 amendments to IFRS 5

16 April 2009 IFRS 5 amended for Annual Improvements to IFRSs 2009 about disclosure
 P a g e | 13

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

requirements in other standards

1 January 2010 Effective date of the April 2009 revisions to IFRS 5

Summary of IFRS 5

Background
IFRS 5 achieves substantial convergence with the requirements of US SFAS 144 Accounting for
the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets with respect to the timing of the classification
of operations as discontinued operations and the presentation of such operations. With respect to
long-lived assets that are not being disposed of, the impairment recognition and measurement
standards in SFAS 144 are significantly different from those in IAS 36 Impairment of Assets.
However those differences have not been addressed in the short-term convergence project.

 Key provisions of IFRS 5 relating to assets held for sale

 Held-for-sale classification. In general, the following conditions must be met for an
asset (or 'disposal group') to be classified as held for sale: [IFRS 5.6-8]
 management is committed to a plan to sell

 the asset is available for immediate sale

 an active programme to locate a buyer is initiated

 the sale is highly probable, within 12 months of classification as held for sale (subject
to limited exceptions)

 the asset is being actively marketed for sale at a sales price reasonable in relation to its
fair value

 actions required to complete the plan indicate that it is unlikely that plan will be
significantly changed or withdrawn

The assets need to be disposed of through sale. Therefore, operations that are expected to be
wound down or abandoned would not meet the definition (but may be classified as discontinued
once abandoned). [IFRS 5.13]
 P a g e | 14

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

However, all classification, presentation and measurement requirements of IFRS 5 apply to a
non-current asset (or disposal group) that us classified as held for distribution to owners. [IFRS
5.5A and IFRIC 17]

 Key provisions of IFRS 5 relating to discontinued operations

 Classification as discontinuing.
A discontinued operation is a component of an entity that either has been disposed of or is
classified as held for sale, and: [IFRS 5.32]
represents either a separate major line of business or a geographical area of operations, and
is part of a single co-ordinated plan to dispose of a separate major line of business or
geographical area of operations, or
is a subsidiary acquired exclusively with a view to resale and the disposal involves loss of
control.
 Income statement presentation.
The sum of the post-tax profit or loss of the discontinued operation and the post-tax gain or loss
recognised on the measurement to fair value less cost to sell or fair value adjustments on the
disposal of the assets (or disposal group) should be presented as a single amount on the face of
the statement of comprehensive income. If the entity presents profit or loss in a separate income
statement, a section identified as relating to discontinued operations is presented in that separate
statement. [IFRS 5.33-33A].
Detailed disclosure of revenue, expenses, pre-tax profit or loss and related income taxes is
required either in the notes or in the statement of comprehensive income in a section distinct
from continuing operations. [IFRS 5.33] Such detailed disclosures must cover both the current
and all prior periods presented in the financial statements. [IFRS 5.34]

 Cash flow statement presentation.

The net cash flows attributable to the operating, investing, and financing activities of a
discontinued operation shall be separately presented on the face of the cash flow statement or
disclosed in the notes. [IFRS 5.33]
 P a g e | 15

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

 No retroactive classification.
IFRS 5 prohibits the retroactive classification as a discontinued operation, when the discontinued
criteria are met after the balance sheet date. [IFRS 5.12]
 Disclosures.
In addition to the income statement and cash flow statement presentations noted above, the
following disclosures are required:
adjustments made in the current period to amounts disclosed as a discontinued operation in prior
periods must be separately disclosed. [IFRS 5.35]
if an entity ceases to classify a component as held for sale, the results of that component
previously presented in discontinued operations must be reclassified and included in income
from continuing operations for all periods presented. [IFRS 5.36]

IFRS 6 — Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources:

Overview

IFRS 6 Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources has the effect of allowing entities
adopting the standard for the first time to use accounting policies for exploration and evaluation
assets that were applied before adopting IFRSs. It also modifies impairment testing of
exploration and evaluation assets by introducing different impairment indicators and allowing
the carrying amount to be tested at an aggregate level (not greater than a segment).
IFRS 6 was issued in December 2004 and applies to annual periods beginning on or after 1
January 2006.

History of IFRS 6

Project on extractive industries carried over from IASC

 P a g e | 16

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

November 2000 IASC issues paper Extractive Industries published and comments invited

16 January 2004 Exposure Draft ED 6 Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral

Resources issued

10 December 2004 IFRS 6 Exploration and Evaluation of Mineral Resources issued

1 January 2006 Effective Date

30 June 2005 Amendment to IFRS 6 on comparative disclosures for 2005 adoptions

Summary of IFRS 6

Exploration for and evaluation of mineral resources mean the search for mineral resources,
including minerals, oil, natural gas and similar non-regenerative resources after the entity has
obtained legal rights to explore in a specific area, as well as the determination of the technical
feasibility and commercial viability of extracting the mineral resource. [IFRS 6.Appendix A]
Exploration and evaluation expenditures are expenditures incurred in connection with the
exploration and evaluation of mineral resources before the technical feasibility and commercial
viability of extracting a mineral resource is demonstrable. [IFRS 6.Appendix A]
IFRS 6 permits an entity to develop an accounting policy for recognition of exploration and
evaluation expenditures as assets without specifically considering the requirements of paragraphs
11 and 12 of IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors. [IFRS
6.9] Thus, an entity adopting IFRS 6 may continue to use the accounting policies applied
immediately before adopting the IFRS. This includes continuing to use recognition and
measurement practices that are part of those accounting policies.
IFRS 6 requires entities recognising exploration and evaluation assets to perform an impairment
test on those assets when facts and circumstances suggest that the carrying amount of the assets
 P a g e | 17

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

may exceed their recoverable amount. [IFRS 6.18]Entities shall measures the impairment in
accordance with IAS 36 Impairment of Assets once it is identified.
IFRS 6 also provides guidance on how to identify cash-generating units. [IFRS 6.21–22]
IFRS 6 requires disclosure of information that identifies and explains the amounts recognised in
its financial statements arising from the exploration for and evaluation of mineral resources,
including: [IFRS 6.23–24]

a. its accounting policies for exploration and evaluation expenditures including the recognition
of exploration and evaluation assets.
b. the amounts of assets, liabilities, income and expense and operating and investing cash flows
arising from the exploration for and evaluation of mineral resources.

An entity shall treat exploration and evaluation assets as a separate class of assets and make the
disclosures required by either IAS 16 or IAS 38 consistent with how the assets are classified.
[IFRS 6.25]
 P a g e | 18

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Comparison of IFRS and Indian Accounting Standards

Topic Indian GAAP IFRS Ind AS

Non-current Assets AS 24 - IFRS 5 - Non- Ind AS 105 - Non-
Held Discontinuing current Assets current Assets
for Sale and Operations Held for Sale and Held for Sale and
Discontinued AS 10 - Accounting Discontinued Discontinued
Operations - Operations Operations
for Fixed Assets
primary IFRIC 17 - Ind AS 10 -
literature Distributions of Non- Appendix A -
cash Distributions of Non-
Assets to Owners cash Assets to
Owners
Non-current Assets There is no standard Non-current assets Similar to IFRS.
Held dealing with to be disposed of
for Sale and non-current assets are classified as held
Discontinued held for sale for sale when the
Operations - though AS 10 deals asset is available for
recognition and with assets held immediate sale
Measurement for disposal. Items of and the sale is highly
fixed assets that probable.
have been retired Depreciation ceases
from active use and on the date when
are held for disposal the assets are
are stated at the classified as held for
lower of their net sale.
book value and Non-current assets
net realisable value classified as held
and are shown for sale are
separately in the measured at the
financial statements. lower of
Any expected loss is its carrying value
recognised and fair value less
immediately in the costs to sell.
statement of profit
and loss.
Non-current Assets AS 24 has no specific Non-cash assets are Similar to IFRS.
Held guidance to be classified as
for Sale and related to non-cash ‘held for distribution
Discontinued assets held for to owners’ when
Operations - non- distribution to the transaction is
cash assets highly probable,
 P a g e | 19

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

held for distribution owners. taking into account
probability of
to owners
shareholders’
approval, if required
in
the jurisdiction.
Such assets are
measured at the
lower
of carrying amount
and fair value less
costs to distribute.
Non-current Assets An operation is An operation is Similar to IFRS.
Held classified as classified as
for Sale and discontinuing at the discontinued when it
Discontinued earlier of (a) has either been
Operations - binding sale disposed of or is
agreement for sale of classified as held for
classification
the sale.
operation and (b) on
approval by the
board of directors of
a detailed formal
plan and
announcement of the
plan.
Distributions of Non- No specific guidance. An entity should Similar to IFRS.
cash measure the
Assets to Owners dividend
payable at the fair
value of the net
assets to be
distributed. The
liability
should be
remeasured at each
reporting date and
at settlement,
with changes
recognised directly
in equity. The
difference between
 P a g e | 20

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

the dividend paid
and the carrying
amount of the net
assets distributed
should be recognised
in profit or loss
and should be
disclosed separately.
Additional
disclosures should be
made, if the net
assets being held
for distribution to
owners meet the
definition of a
discontinued
operation.
If shareholders have
a choice of
receiving either a
non-cash asset or
a cash alternative,
the liability should
be measured
considering both the
fair value of each
alternative and
management’s
assessment of the
probabilities of each
outcome.
IFRIC 17 applies to
pro rata
distributions of non-
cash assets
(all owners are
treated equally) but
does not apply to
common control
transactions.
 P a g e | 21

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Exploration for and No equivalent IFRS 6 - Exploration Ind AS 106 -
Evaluation of standard. However for and Exploration for and
Mineral there is a Guidance Evaluation of Evaluation of
Resources - primary Note on Mineral Resources
Mineral Resources
literature Accounting for Oil (Ind AS 106 will be
and Gas applied with
Producing Activities. modification from a
date to be
notified later on)
Exploration for and As per the guidance Exploration and Similar to IFRS.
Evaluation note, there evaluation assets
of Mineral are two alternative are measured at cost
methods for or revaluation
Resources – general
accounting for less accumulated
acquisition, amortisation
exploration and impairment loss.
and development An entity
costs, viz. the determines the
Successful Efforts policy specifying
Method or the Full which expenditure is
Cost Method. The recognised as
guidance note exploration and
recommends the
evaluation assets.
Successful Efforts
Method.
AS 28, Impairment
of Assets is
applicable
irrespective of the
method
of accounting used.
 P a g e | 22

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

Findings and Conclusion
Between August and September 2013 the Economist Intelligence Unit, on behalf of Deloitte,
surveyed 300 insurers to investigate their views on the intricacies of the International Financial
Reporting Standards (IFRS) and their level of preparation for implementation. This section
features a small selection of key findings from the survey analysis.
 P a g e | 23

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

 P a g e | 24

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

 P a g e | 25

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

 P a g e | 26

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison

References

 IFRS Official site

 http://www.ifrs.org
 Deloitte IAS Plus
 http://www.iasplus.com/en/standards
 IFRS Made Easy (2011) Copyright John Wiley and Sons, (10th ed.)
- Steve M. Bragg
 Transparency in Financial Reporting: A concise comparison of IFRS and US
GAAP (2009) Copyright Harriman House Limited.
- Ruth Ann McEwen
 Financial Accounting : A Managerial Perspective (2011), (4th ed.)
- R. Narayanaswamy
 Indian Accounting Standards: Practices, Comparisons, and Interpretations
(2006),
- Bhattacharya
 International Accounting/Financial Reporting Standards Guide (2008),
Copyright IASB, UK.
- David Alexander, Simon Archer
 IFRS and Indian GAAP – Decoding The Differences (2011),
- Pricewater House and Coopers.
 IFRS in India -PwC
 www.pwc.in/services/ifrs/ifrs-in-india.jhtml
 Transition to Ind AS: Practical Insight -KPMG
 www.kpmg.com/IN/en/.../Transition-to-Ind-AS-Practical-Insight
 IFRS India version Ind AS is a big switch for trade: KPMG
 http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/tax/ifrs-india-version-ind-as-isbig-switch-
for-trade-kpmg_555391.html?utm_source=ref_article
 P a g e | 27

IFRS : Analysis and Comparison