Expert Advisory Committee
ICAI-Expert Advisory Committee
Options:

Query No. 8

Subject:

Issue of spares and stores to dredgers.1

 

A. Facts of the Case

1. A public sector undertaking, under the Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, was incorporated on 29th March, 1976 under the Companies Act, 1956. The main objective of the company is to provide integrated dredging services to all major and minor ports, Indian Navy, fishing harbours and other maritime organisations.

2. The dredging activities are carried out by ocean going dredgers, self-propelled or dumb dredgers. As compared to any other ocean going vessel, the dredger has got a much greater amount of machinery installed. The trailer dredgers have almost twice the amount of machinery fitted as compared to an ocean going ship of the same size. Most of the time, dredgers operate in various types of soils and sandy waters which affect the outer surface of hull plates as well as the internal plates of the hopper, which in turn, results in wear and tear of hull and other soil touching parts/equipments. These dredgers would normally be working 24 hours a day continuously for a period of about 3 weeks when the machinery will be stopped for undertaking preventive maintenance. Such continuous usage of the machinery in the shallow and sandy waters of the port causes heavy wear and tear necessitating periodic repairs in a dry dock and also the consumption of spares and stores.

3. The querist has informed that the spares used are machinery spares in nature as these spares are intended to be utilised on the fixed assets, i.e., dredgers. The procurement of these spares is need-based and against the specific requirement indicated by Masters/Chief Engineer on board of the dredgers through an indent. Such spares are replacements for parts worn out during usage of the machinery. Thus, replacement may take place at the next following maintenance period or during the next following dry dock of the dredger. Till such time, the spares so procured may generally be delivered on board the particular dredger or sent to the Central Warehouse at Visakhapatnam. In the latter case, the value of the spares is treated as inventory till the time of issue to the dredgers. These spares do not increase the future benefits from the existing assets (dredgers and other crafts) beyond their previously assessed standard of performance. These spares are procured to keep up the original functioning of the machinery on board the dredger.

4. The querist has mentioned that the cost of initial spares, i.e., the spares purchased along with the dredgers is capitalised. The cost of spares and stores purchased subsequently during the operation/repair of the dredgers is charged off as operational expenditure.

5. The current fleet of the company includes dredgers, tugs, survey launches and other ancillary crafts like barges, pontoons, etc. The above crafts are depreciated at the rate of 7% under straight line method (SLM), as provided in Schedule XIV to the Companies Act, 1956. The residual value of 2% is carried in the books as Written Down Value. Presently, the company owns 12 dredgers, out of which 9 dredgers have been depreciated to 98%. All these dredgers are in operation and all these crafts are expected to have a further useful life of at least 5 to 10 years.

6. During the course of audit of accounts for the year 2006-07, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (C&AG) (PDCA& MAB, Hyderabad) issued a provisional comment on accounting of stores and spares issued to dredgers. The accounting policy 4(a) in respect of spares and stores and the provisional comment 4(a) on this accounting policy of the company along with the company’s reply are reproduced below:

       Accounting Policy

      “4. Operational Expenses

       (a) Spares & Stores:

        Spares and stores and lubricants delivered to the crafts during the year acknowledged by the Master/CEO are charged to revenue. Provision is made for the material delivered to crafts upto 31st March in respect of which acknowledgements are not received.”

       Comment of Government Audit

       “4(a) This is understated by Rs. 99.16 crore due to failure to account for the stores and spares which were acknowledged by Masters of the vessels and lying on board the dredgers as on 31 March, 2007. This has resulted in overstatement of consumption of stores and spares for the year by Rs. 29.91 crore and prior period consumption by Rs. 72.25 crore and understatement of net profit after prior period adjustments by Rs. 99.16 crore. There is a need to change the accounting policy so that it is not in conflict with Accounting Standard (AS) 2, ‘Valuation of Inventories’.”

        Reply of the company

       “The accounting policy in respect of spares and stores has been consistently followed since inception and the same policy is being followed by other companies in similar business. The accounting policy needs to be viewed in the background of the dredging and shipping industry.

         The company is meeting dredging requirements of various major and minor ports in India. Practically, it becomes very difficult to maintain/monitor the suggested method of spares/ stores on board the vessel keeping in view the difficulties involved.

         Some of the important factors that need to be considered in this regard include:

          (a) Dredgers are manned by floating officers and crew whose skills are highly specialised and confined to dredging operations. They are not accustomed to record keeping, except insofar as it may be necessary to operate the dredger (navigation and dredging).

          (b) Floating personnel are continuously changing (3 months on and 2 months off) as per the rules applicable to them and every time there are necessary handing over/ taking over formalities.

          (c) Dredgers operate most of the time in sea. They require minimum spares on board all the time.

          (d) Spares supplied on board the dredgers are exposed to sea conditions and therefore, deteriorate at comparatively faster rate.

          (e) Sometimes spares required by a dredger due to urgency may have to be supplied from another dredger.

          (f) Estimating value of spares on board on a particular date will be impractical as these spares may have been carried for several years.

           Because of the above factors, the shipping industry is following this specific policy of charging spares as and when delivered.

           The value of inventories amounting to Rs. 99.16 crore appears to be based on the Management report furnished by Dredge Masters. The figures so arrived are not authenticated/supported by necessary documentary evidence, i.e., invoice giving cost, taxes, duties, cost of bringing it to its present location, etc. Besides, the proposed change, if implemented, would seriously distort the true and fair view of the current year profitability.

            It is further submitted that AS 2 is not applicable to the subject spares as AS 2 specifically excludes machinery spares in connection with items of fixed assets and therefore, the question of any conflict with AS 2 does not arise. Hence, Audit is requested to drop the Comment.”

            Further, in respect of the discussions with C&AG (PDCA & MAB Hyderabad), the querist has informed that it was also submitted that such procurement of spares and stores do not satisfy any of the following conditions to capitalise:

             (a) enhance the life of the dredger, or

             (b) increase the previously assessed standard of performance, or

             (c) it results in reduction of cost of production.

7. According to the querist, the subsequent procurement of spares and stores has been only to maintain the normal functioning of the dredger. In view of this position, the cost of such procurement is to be expensed in the year of its incurrence. Further, as per the querist, this accounting treatment is in accordance with Accounting Standard (AS) 10, ‘Accounting for Fixed Assets’, and also with the rationale of the opinions issued by the Expert Advisory Committee of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. Besides this, the querist has mentioned that the accounting policy is in line with the industry practice.

8. The querist has mentioned that after considerable discussions, the C&AG (PDCA & MAB, Hyderabad), agreed to the contentions of the company that it does not fall within the scope of AS 2 and revised the earlier Provisional Comment 4(a) stating that the accounting treatment of the company is not in consonance with AS 10 and forwarded the revised Comment 4(a) to C&AG, New Delhi along with other comments. The querist has provided the Revised Provisional Comment 4(a) along with the company’s reply for the perusal of the Committee, the relevant extracts of which are reproduced as below:

          Comment of Government Audit

          “Profit and Loss Account

                B. Expenditure on:

              Operations (Schedule X)
              Spares and Stores – Rs. 4534.97 lakh

          4(a)(i) This includes spares valuing Rs. 9.86 crore issued to three dredgers which have a residual life. The spares should have been capitalised in accordance with Accounting Standard (AS) 10, ‘Accounting for Fixed Assets’ and depreciated over the remaining life period of these dredgers. Failure to do so resulted in overstatement of consumption by Rs. 9.86 crore, understatement of Gross Block to the same extent, understatement of depreciation by Rs. 1.38 crore and profit for the year by Rs. 8.48 crore.

           (ii) This also includes spares worth Rs. 35.49 crore issued to remaining dredgers with no residual life. The value of these spares should have been capitalised and then charged off to Profit and Loss Account through depreciation account. This has resulted in overstatement of consumption by Rs. 35.49 crore and understatement of Gross Block and depreciation to the same extent.

           (iii) Such incorrect charging-off of spares issued to dredgers in the past but not consumed and lying on board the dredgers as on 31st March, 2007 has led to understatement of Gross Block by Rs. 72.25 crore. Due to adopting an accounting policy which is not in consonance with AS 10, the Gross Block is not being properly accounted for. There is a need to change the accounting policy No. 4(a) relating to issue of spares and stores so that it is not in conflict with AS 10.”

          Reply of the company

          “…For ready reference, we are furnishing below the particular accounting policies adopted by various similar companies in the industry:

         A Ltd.

         Accounting policy No.7 (e) –

         7. Valuation of stocks:

            (e) Store/spares including paints, etc. are charged to revenue as consumed when directly issued to ships. Items of stores/spares, which cannot be delivered immediately are shown under stores/spares in transit and are cleared on receiving acknowledgement from the ship. However, all items of stores/spares purchased within last 3 months of the financial year, for which acknowledgement are not received, are treated as stock and valued at lower of cost or realisable value.

        B Ltd.

        Accounting policy No. (i) (ii)

        (i) Operating expenses:

        (ii) Stores and spares delivered on board the ships and rigs are charged to revenue.

        C Ltd.

        Accounting policy No.(g)

         (g) Stores and Spares:

            Stores and spares purchased are directly issued to ships and the value of such purchases is charged to the expenses account as consumed.

       Further to above, we would like to reiterate that the values indicated cannot be authenticated/supported by necessary documentary evidence, such as, invoice giving cost, taxes, duties, cost of bringing it to its present location in respect of each item of the spare and its present condition on board the dredger as required to pass necessary accounting entries in the books.

       In view of this, we are unable to vouch for the correctness of various figures stated in the modified provisional comments, viz.,

       (a) Rs. 9.86 crore in respect of the three dredgers which have a residual life,

       (b) Spares worth Rs. 35.49 crore issued to remaining dredgers with no residual life, and

       (c) Rs. 72.25 crore purported to have been incorrectly charged off of spares issued to dredgers in the past

        
9. The querist has informed that the revised comment along with other comments was discussed and clarified at C&AG’s office, New Delhi. The C&AG’s office has dropped the above comment subject to the company’s assurance that the subject Provisional Comment will be referred to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India for its expert opinion. Further, the querist has mentioned that in this connection, the company has relied on the earlier opinions of the Expert Advisory Committee on the subject published in various volumes of Compendium of Opinions, viz., Query No. 13 of Volume XX, Query No. 32 of Volume XX, Query No. 37 of Volume XX, and Query No. 22 of Volume XXIII.

B. Query

10. In view of the above, the querist has sought the opinion of the Expert Advisory Committee on the following issues:

         (i) Whether the accounting practice followed by the company, viz., for charging off spares to expenditure as and when these are issued to dredgers, as per the facts and circumstances, is in accordance with the provisions of AS 10.

         (ii) If not,

         (a) whether such subsequent procurement of spares and stores needs to be capitalised and depreciated over the remaining life period of the dredgers as opined by the C&AG Audit.

         (b) whether such procurement of spares and stores also needs to be capitalised in respect of dredgers with no residual life. Whether these spares and stores should be capitalised and then charged off to the profit and loss account through depreciation account as opined by C&AG Audit. (The querist has invited reference to the earlier opinion of the Expert Advisory Committee published as Query No. 3 of Volume XXIII of the Compendium of Opinions.)

C. Points considered by the Committee

11. The Committee notes the following paragraph of Accounting Standard (AS) 2, ‘Valuation of Inventories’, which states as below:

            “4. Inventories encompass goods purchased and held for resale, for example, merchandise purchased by a retailer and held for resale, computer software held for resale, or land and other property held for resale. Inventories also encompass finished goods produced, or work in progress being produced, by the enterprise and include materials, maintenance supplies, consumables and loose tools awaiting use in the production process. Inventories do not include machinery spares which can be used only in connection with an item of fixed asset and whose use is expected to be irregular; such machinery spares are accounted for in accordance with Accounting Standard (AS) 10, ‘Accounting for Fixed Assets’.”

12. The Committee also notes the following paragraphs of Accounting Standard (AS) 10, ‘Accounting for Fixed Assets’, which state as below:

          “8.2 Stand-by equipment and servicing equipment are normally capitalised. Machinery spares are usually charged to the profit and loss statement as and when consumed. However, if such spares can be used only in connection with an item of fixed asset and their use is expected to be irregular, it may be appropriate to allocate the total cost on a systematic basis over a period not exceeding the useful life of the principal item.”

           “12. Improvements and Repairs

            12.1 Frequently, it is difficult to determine whether subsequent expenditure related to fixed asset represents improvements that ought to be added to the gross book value or repairs that ought to be charged to the profit and loss statement. Only expenditure that increases the future benefits from the existing asset beyond its previously assessed standard of performance is included in the gross book value, e.g., an increase in capacity.”

             “23. Subsequent expenditures related to an item of fixed asset should be added to its book value only if they increase the future benefits from the existing asset beyond its previously assessed standard of performance.”

13. On the basis of the paragraphs of AS 2 and AS 10 reproduced above, the Committee notes that for accounting purposes, there are generally two types of machinery spares. The first type are those machinery spares which cannot be used in connection with a particular/specific item of a fixed asset and whose use is not irregular, and are considered as inventories and accordingly need to be accounted for as per the principles enunciated in AS 2. The second type of machinery spares are those which can be used only in relation to a specific item of a fixed asset and whose use is expected to be irregular, and they should be accounted for as per AS 10. Such spares are commonly known as capital spares/ insurance spares.

14. The Committee notes from paragraph 8 of the Facts of the Case that whereas the Government Audit (New Delhi) has given its opinion on the basis that the machinery spares in question are capital spares, the accounting treatment followed by the company is based on the consideration that the spares are of the nature of inventory except in the instance of initial spares purchased at the time of the purchase of the dredgers itself. The Committee also notes from paragraph 6 that the Government Audit (Hyderabad) also appears to consider the machinery spares of the nature of inventory. The Committee further notes that the Facts of the Case do not contain information to decide whether the machinery spares are of the nature of capital spares keeping in view the requirements of paragraph 8.2 of AS 10. The Committee is, therefore, of the view that the company should first decide whether the spares are of capital nature or of the nature of inventory keeping in view the requirements of the aforesaid paragraph of AS 10. It is also possible that some machinery spares may be of capital nature while others may not be of that nature, i.e., these may be of the nature of inventory, e.g., in case of spares which can be used by different dredgers and, therefore, not specific to an item of fixed asset as contemplated in paragraph 8.2 of AS 10. In the absence of the facts, the opinion of the Committee hereinafter deals with both the situations, namely, if the spares are of capital nature and in case the spares are of the nature of inventory.

In case the spares are of capital nature

15. Machinery spares of the nature of capital spares/insurance spares are to be capitalised separately, whether purchased along with the principal fixed asset, i.e., the dredgers, or purchased subsequently. The Committee notes that at present the company capitalises the initial spares, i.e., those purchased with the dredgers, and charges to revenue those spares which are purchased subsequently. In this respect, the Committee reiterates that in case the spares purchased by the company are capital spares, these are to be capitalised whenever these are purchased. As per the requirements of AS 10, capital spares purchased along with the dredgers should be depreciated on a systematic basis over a period not exceeding the useful life of the dredger to which they relate. In case of capital spares purchased subsequently, depreciation should be charged on a systematic basis over a period not exceeding the balance/remaining useful life of the particular dredger to which the spares relate. On the date the capital spare is actually put to use, i.e., it replaces the worn out part in the corresponding dredger, the written down value of the capital spare at that date is immediately written off to the profit and loss account.

This is done as the replacement of the spare does not increase the future benefits from the existing dredger beyond its previously assessed standard of performance.

16. In case of spares purchased subsequently in relation to dredgers whose residual life has expired, the Committee notes that as per the accounting treatment given in AS 10, the cost of capital spares should be amortised on a systematic basis over a period not exceeding the useful life of the principal asset, i.e., the particular dredger. Thus, where the useful life of the dredger has expired, i.e., it has been completely depreciated in the books, the Committee is of the view that capital spares, should be first capitalised and then charged to the statement of profit and loss through depreciation in the year of purchase itself. The Committee also notes that this accounting treatment is in consonance with the view expressed by the Committee in its earlier opinion published in Compendium of Opinions, Volume XXIII, Query No.3.

In case the spares are of the nature of inventory

17. The Committee notes from paragraph 8.2 of AS 10 reproduced in paragraph 12 above that the machinery spares of the nature of inventory are usually charged to the profit and loss statement as and when consumed. The Committee notes that the company is treating the machinery spares as of the nature of inventory and are charging the same to the profit and loss account when these are issued for consumption. The Committee also notes the accounting policies of certain companies quoted by the querist in paragraph 8 of the Facts of the Case, wherein the spares are being treated as of the nature of inventory and are considered to be consumed when issued for consumption. The Committee is of the view that a spare can be considered as consumed when issued from store in an event the spare is to be immediately used against a specific breakdown of the relevant component of the dredger. However, in case the spares are ordinarily issued to a dredger awaiting breakdown in the dredger, it indicates that spares are lying on the dredgers as inventory. In the latter case, it is imperative for the company to have an appropriate system of inventory management and control on the dredger in case the spares are material in amount. The difficulties indicated by the company in paragraph 6 of the Facts of the Case do not override the requirements of the Standards. What it indicates is the lack of proper system of accounting for spares of the nature of inventory.

18. The Committee is also of the view that in case the company considers the machinery spares of the nature of inventory, the same should be treated as such even if purchased initially along with dredgers. For this purpose, the value of the spares may have to be estimated on a reasonable basis.

D. Opinion

19. On the basis of the above, the Committee is of the following opinion in respect of the issues raised by the querist in paragraph 10 above:

         (i) As per the facts and circumstances of the given case, the current accounting practice of the company of charging off spares to expenditure as and when these are issued to dredgers is not in accordance with the provisions of AS 10.

        (ii)(a) If the spares are of capital nature and purchased subsequently, these need to be capitalised and depreciated systematically over the remaining useful life of the particular dredger in whose connection these are purchased and expected to be used as discussed in paragraph 15 above.

        (b) In case the spares are of capital nature and where the life of the particular dredger is over, the same should be charged to the profit and loss account through depreciation as discussed in paragraph 16 above.

 

1 Opinion finalised by the Committee on 30.4.2008