Expert Advisory Committee
ICAI-Expert Advisory Committee
Options:

Query No. 26

 

Subject:

Revenue recognition where different rates of depreciation are followed for

preparation of financial statements and for tariff fixation.1

 

A. Facts of the Case

 

1. A company owns and operates a combined cycle power plant in India. The plant was installed and commissioned under a turnkey engineering, procurement and construction contract by a foreign company. The commercial operation of the company was achieved in the year 2001-02.

 

 

2. The company has entered into a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with a State Electricity Board (SEB) for the sale of the entire power generated. The pricing is consistent with the standard norms as per the policy of the Government of India in respect of independent power producers based on capacity of operation i.e., Plant Load Factor (PLF), including fuel cost on Axiomatic Standard Efficiency including post-tax return. The PPA is backed by a sovereign guarantee of the State Government.

 

 

3. According to the querist, the company is preparing accounts in accordance with the requirements of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956, and depreciation is charged based upon the rates prescribed under Schedule XIV to the Act.

 

 

4. The querist has supplied the following information in respect of revenue recognition by the company:

 

(a) The revenue from sale of power is recognised in the books of account of independent power producers as per the tariff prescribed by the PPA.

 

(b) The company recognises revenue in its books of account on a cost plus basis in accordance with the two-part tariff policy of the Government of India for independent power producers consisting of Variable Fuel Cost and Fixed Capacity Charge.

 

(c) The Variable Fuel Cost is recognised based on standard fuel consumed for the actual power generated on prescribed standard norms (the standard has been Heat Rate of 1900 Kilo Calories).

 

(d) The Fixed Capacity Charge is a function of notional cost of assets created in respect of capital cost that needs to be approved by the Central Electricity Authority. (The notional capital cost for this purpose is lower than the actual cost of assets created as per audited accounts, as there are certain anticipated disallowances for notional capital cost purposes.)

 

(e) The components of Fixed Capacity Charge are:

(i) Debt: Interest on long term foreign currency and Indian rupee loans not exceeding 70% of notional capital cost and the guarantee commission on deferred payment guarantee. Since the interest payment in respect of loans is capped by a notional limit of 70% of notional total capital cost, the actual outgo for the company is higher.

 

(ii) Depreciation: Computed equivalent to those rates set forth in the Government of India, Ministry of Power Notification No. 265(E) dated March 29, 1994, which uses rates prescribed by the erstwhile Electricity Supply Act, 1948.

 

(iii) Operational & Maintenance (O&M) Expenses: Restricted to 2.50% of the notional capital cost pegged to Consumer Price Index and Wholesale Price Index for inflation. The actual cost of O&M expense for the past 3 years had always been higher than what is billed as tariff to the SEB.

 

(iv) Interest on working capital: Means an annual allowance equal to the sum of 1 month fuel, 1 month O&M expense, spares at 1% of notional capital cost as computed in a specified manner and 2 months’ average receivables times the working capital interest rate applicable at the date of submission of Fixed Capacity Charge estimate for each year. The actual working capital interest cost incurred by the company over the last 3 operational years has never matched the amount billed as tariff from SEB.

 

(v) Incentive: Provided on equity at graded levels for actual generation exceeding standard PLF of 68.4932%. PLF is aggregate of actual generation and deemed generation.(Deemed generation means the period in which the plant was available for generation, but was not generating, as the Electricity Board did not draw power.)

 

(vi) Variation in Exchange rates: Actual variation in exchange rates on repayment of long term foreign currency loan and return on equity is reimbursed by SEB.

 

(vii) Recovery of Fixed Capacity Charge in full only on achieving standard PLF of 68.4932%. Lower PLF would mean a proportionate reduction in Fixed Capacity Charge.

 

5. The recovery of revenue as per the tariff in the form of Variable Fuel Cost and Fixed Capacity Charge prescribed by the PPA is the one, which has actual and notional element further incentivised for PLF achieved beyond 68.4932% whilst actual expenses in respect of all components of tariff do not necessarily match, except for foreign exchange variation in respect of foreign exchange loans repaid.

 

 

6. The querist has stated that the company has been following the rates of depreciation as mandated by Schedule XIV to the Companies Act,1956. The rates under the Electricity Supply Act are used by the PPA for determination of tariff insofar as depreciation is concerned. The rates prescribed by the Electricity Supply Act are higher.

 

 

7. As per the querist, the company has taken a view that it has provided for depreciation as required by law; the rates prescribed under Electricity Supply Act are only a means for pricing. Hence there is no need to either provide in the books for depreciation at the rates prescribed by the Electricity Supply Act or defer revenue to the extent of the difference in the amount of depreciation. According to the querist, the company is of the view that the question of deferring revenue should not arise at all because the billing as per PPA incorporating the pricing formula is for delivered power based on cost that have actual and notional elements.

 

 

8. The querist has expressed his views as below:

(i) PPA prescribes just the method of computation of tariff for the purposes of billing to Electricity Board and not beyond.

 

(ii) All the components of Fixed Capacity Charge, (except variation in foreign exchange in regard to repayments of foreign exchange loans) are notional that are billed as tariff and hence none of the components would match with the actuals for any year.

 

(iii) The various parameters like PLF, restriction on O&M expense etc., are some of the means of determination of recovery of Fixed Capacity Charge rather than a back to back recovery of cost incurred by the company.

 

(iv) If the company were not available for generating power for various technical or other reasons there would be short recovery of Fixed Capacity Charge, of which depreciation is one of the components. The charge to the books of account for depreciation would however be according to Schedule XIV rates that are being followed by the company. If matching principle is to be followed, short recovery of Fixed Capacity Charge does not mean the charge of depreciation in the books of account is also deferred. Depreciation, a component of Fixed Capacity Charge in revenue, can not be matched with the lower charge of depreciation in the books of account.

 

(v) The company has been correctly charging Schedule XIV rates of depreciation in its books of account. The rates prescribed for the purposes of determination of the tariff are different. It is the contention of the company that the rate of depreciation prescribed under the agreement is for determination of the tariff. In fact the PPA has various notional components of pricing and hence there is no way the individual components could be related to the actual debits in the profit and loss account. It has complied with the law by providing for depreciation in accordance with Schedule XIV. Consequent to this, there is no mismatch of income, which is accounted based on the agreement and expenses. Hence, no deferment of revenue is warranted in respect of the differential depreciation (difference between the higher rate under the Electricity Supply Act used by the PPA and the lower rate as per Schedule XIV that is actually charged in the books of account.)

 

B . Query

 

9. The querist has sought the opinion of the Expert Advisory Committee as to whether revenue needs to be deferred to the extent of differential depreciation arising because of different rates of depreciation being followed for the purpose of preparation of financial statements than those followed for pricing sale of power to the State Electricity Board.

 

 

C. Points considered by the Committee

 

10. The Committee notes that the query relates to the issue on the need to defer revenue in view of differential rates of depreciation charged in the books of account and those reckoned for fixation of selling prices. Therefore, the Committee has not touched upon any other issue that may be contained in the Facts of the Case.

 

 

11. The Committee notes that the revenue recognition principles have been prescribed in Accounting Standard (AS) 9, ‘Revenue Recognition’, issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. The Committee further notes that AS 9 does not recognise deferment of revenue in a situation where the depreciation charged in the books of account is different from the depreciation for the purpose of fixation of selling price. Accordingly, the Committee is of the view that revenue cannot be deferred in the case under consideration.

 

 

D. Opinion

 

12. On the basis of the above, the Committee is of the opinion that the revenue should not be deferred on account of differential depreciation arising because of different rates of depreciation being followed for the purpose of preparation of financial statements than those followed for pricing sale of power to the State Electricity Board.

 

 

1 Opinion finalised by the Committee on 27.12.2004