Expert Advisory Committee
ICAI-Expert Advisory Committee
Options:

Query No. 28

 

Subject: 

  Reimbursement  of  travel  expenses  etc., 

to  employees  on retirement.1

 

A. Facts  of  the  Case

 

1. One of the objectives of a government company incorporated under the  Companies  Act,  1956,  is  to  set  up  thermal  power  plants  in  various geographical locations in the country and to supply bulk power to the various State Electricity Boards/successor entities.   The company is governed by the provisions of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. As the government has not  prescribed  any  format  for  the  statement  of  accounts  for  the  central undertakings engaged in generation of electricity, the company is preparing its accounts as per Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956, since inception and the same have been accepted by various audit agencies.

 

2. As per the Travelling Allowance Rules of the company, an employee on retirement  is entitled to  certain payments,  as admissible to  a serving employee  on  transfer,  depending  upon his  status/pay range,  to  meet  the expenses of travel for himself and members of his family, and shifting of baggage for proceeding to home town or any place in India where he intends to settle after retirement. The amounts payable to a retiring employee as per the relevant extracts from the Travelling Allowance Rules of the company, are as follows:

 

         (i)         Reimbursement of single journey fare for self and members of his family by the mode and class of travel as per his                               entitlement.

 

         (ii)        Reimbursement of conveyance charges for journeys between airport/railway station/bus stand and residence.

  

         (iii)      Daily allowance as per entitlement towards food and incidentals for the period of journey from the headquarters to the                     destination station.

 

         (iv)   Reimbursement of actual expenses towards transportation of baggage by goods train upto certain limits as per entitlement,                     transportation of conveyance by passenger train, mileage allowance for carriage of personal effects from residence to                     railway station and vice-versa, octroi duty, entry taxes, terminal taxes and insurance charges on household effects and                     conveyance, etc., subject to production of receipts.

 

         (v)     Transfer grant equal to one month of his wage/salary (Pay plus Dearness Allowance) subject to a maximum of Rs.10,000                     on fulfilment of the following conditions:

 

                  (a)        The transfer involves change of station of posting and residence;

 

                  (b)        The transfer involves actual breaking and setting up of establishment;

 

                  (c)        The company’s accommodation in possession of the employee at the old station of his posting is vacated; and

 

         (vi)   Reimbursement of package charges subject to ceiling as per entitlement.

 

The amount with regard to the above benefits is required to be claimed by the employee within six months of retirement.

 

3. The company’s contention is that since the amounts are paid only to employees who actually shift out of their last place of posting, the said expense is treated as accrued on incurrence of expenditure and submission of claim by a retiring employee. Accordingly, the company has been consistently accounting for the expense on submission of claim by the retiring employee supported with relevant vouchers for expenditure incurred.

 

4. During the review of accounts of the company for the year 2001-02, the government auditors  observed  that the  above  benefit is  a  retirement benefit and is in the nature of a Defined Benefit Scheme.  Auditors were of the view that as per Accounting Standard (AS) 15, ‘Accounting for Retirement Benefits in the Financial Statements of Employers’, provision should have been made every year in the accounts for accruing liability on account of this facility  calculated  according  to  actuarial  valuation.  In  support  of  the observation, reference was made by the auditors to the opinion of the Expert Advisory Committee to query no. 11 given at pages 60-66 of Volume XVIII of the Compendium of Opinions.

 

5. The company’s contentions in the matter are as follows:

 

         (i)      The facts of the case referred to in the above opinion of the Expert Advisory Committee are different from those of the                              company under consideration. In the case referred to in the earlier opinion of the Expert Advisory Committee, all employees,                     at their option, are entitled to a lumpsum payment equal to one month’s salary last drawn as ‘Settlement Allowance’                              irrespective of the place of settlement.  In other words, even if an employee does not change his place of residence on                     retirement, he is entitled to the lumpsum payment. No such lumpsum ‘Settlement Allowance’ is admissible to the employees                     in the case of the company under consideration. In the given case, a retiring employee is reimbursed expenses on travel for                     self and family and for shifting his baggage to his home town or any place in India other than the place of his last posting. In                     case the employee does not shift out of the last place of posting within 6 months of retirement, no amount is payable.

 

         (ii)        It may be mentioned that at the time of joining the company, the employees are reimbursed joining expenses for self and                   family and for shifting of baggage to the place of posting. On the same analogy, reimbursement of journey fare and expenses                   for shifting of baggage from the place of posting to the home town/place of settlement is made at the time of retirement and                   the same cannot be said to be a retirement benefit to the employees similar to gratuity, post-retirement medical                                     reimbursement, etc.

 

         (iii)   Further, the amounts payable by the company to the retiring employees for travel expenses cannot be reasonably estimated in                  view of the number of variables such as the place of last posting, place where the employee would like to settle, family size,                  expenses likely to be incurred, etc., which cannot be foreseen to facilitate reasonable estimation by the company or by                           actuarial valuation. Even assuming the said reimbursement is a ‘retirement benefit’, keeping in view the provisions of                               paragraph 2 of AS 15 which provides that “this statement does not apply to those retirement benefits for which the employer’s                  obligation cannot be reasonably estimated, e.g., ad-hoc ex-gratia payments made to employees on retirement”, the company is                  of the view that the same is not covered by AS 15.

 

B . Query

 

6. The querist has sought the opinion of the Expert Advisory Committee on the following issues:

 

         (a)        Whether the reimbursement of journey fare and other expenses for shifting baggage, to employees who settle at a place                       other than the place of last posting on retirement, as per the company’s rules is a ‘retirement benefit’.

 

         (b)        Whether the provisions of AS 15 are applicable to such reimbursement since the employer’s obligation cannot be                                reasonably estimated.

 

C. Points  considered  by  the  Committee

 

7. The Committee notes that Accounting Standard (AS) 15, ‘Accounting for Retirement Benefits in the Financial Statements of Employers’, issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, deals with accounting for retirement benefits in the financial statements of employers. The Committee notes that paragraph 2 of AS 15 states as follows:

 

“2. Retirement benefits usually consist of:

 

         (a)        Provident fund

 

         (b)        Superannuation/pension

 

         (c)        Gratuity

 

         (d)        Leave encashment benefit on retirement

 

         (e)        Post-retirement health and welfare schemes

 

         (f)         Other retirement benefits.

 

 This Statement applies to retirement benefits in the form of provident fund, superannuation/pension and gratuity provided by an employer to employees, whether in pursuance of requirements of any law or otherwise. It also applies to retirement benefits in the form of leave encashment benefit, health and welfare schemes and other retirement benefits, if the predominant characteristics of these benefits are the same as those of provident fund, superannuation/pension or gratuity benefit, i.e. if such a retirement benefit is in the nature of either a defined contribution scheme or a defined benefit scheme as described in this Statement. This Statement does not apply to those retirement benefits for which the employer’s obligation cannot be reasonably estimated, e.g., ad hoc ex-gratia payments made to employees on retirement.”

 

8. The Committee notes that AS 15 clearly states that the Standard applies to other retirement benefits only if the predominant characteristics of these benefits are the same as those of provident fund, superannuation/pension or gratuity, i.e., if such a retirement benefit is in the nature of either a defined contribution scheme or a defined benefit scheme as described in this Standard. The Committee also notes that AS 15 defines ‘Defined contribution schemes’ and ‘Defined benefit schemes’ as under:

 

“Defined contribution schemes are retirement benefit schemes under which amounts to be paid as retirement benefits are determined by contributions to a fund together with earnings thereon.”

 

“Defined benefit schemes are retirement benefit schemes under which amounts to be paid as retirement benefits are determinable usually by reference to employee’s earnings and/or years of service.”

 

9. From the above, the Committee observes that reimbursement of journey fares etc., on retirement is neither a defined contribution scheme, nor a defined benefit  scheme.   It  is  not  a  defined  contribution  scheme  because  no contributions are to be made to a fund for the payment of the obligation arising under the scheme.  Further, the essence of a defined benefit scheme is also not present as it requires that the benefit payable to the employee is determinable with reference to factors such as employee’s earnings and/or years of service.  In the present case, the employer is undertaking obligation of reimbursing to the retiring employee expenses actually incurred by him on travel for self and family and for shifting his baggage to his home town or any place in India other than the place of his last posting.  The scheme also stipulates a time limit, i.e., in case the employee does not shift from the last place of posting within six months of retirement, no amount is payable. Thus, the  scheme  is  not  in  the  nature  of  a  ‘retirement  benefit’.   Further,  the Committee notes that the said expenses accrue on incurrence of expenditure and submission of claim by a retiring employee, and, therefore, these should be accounted for by the company at the time of submission of claim by the retiring employee.

 

D.  Opinion

 

10. On the basis of the above, the Committee is of the following opinion on the issues raised in paragraph 6:

 

         (a)        The reimbursement of journey fare and other expenses for shifting baggage, to employees who settle at a place other than                       the place of last posting on retirement, as per the company’s rules is not a retirement benefit.

 

         (b)        In view of (a) above, the provisions of AS 15 are not applicable to such a reimbursement.

 

  1  Opinion finalised by the Committee on 30.1.2003.