GST Course

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


Dear Readers,

I am sorry to come out with filling unpalatable information.

'A random scrutiny of XBRL filing of financial statements by few companies to MCA for FY 2010-11 reveals significant variations in disclosures in published results and the XBRL filings due to ‘incorrect’ mapping of disclosures. It has been observed that few disclosures were ‘mapped/tagged’ with incorrect accounting concept despite availability of appropriate element in taxonomy. It has also been observed that provisions of “Block Text tagging” and/or “Footnote” have been inappropriately used to report disclosures, like subsidiary details, related party transactions, Director’s Report, etc., even when appropriate elements were available in the taxonomy for such disclosures. Few instances of “incorrect” tagging of XBRL documents are provided at Annexure-I’

Above report is shocking to me. More than that, following conclusion in the General Circular  33/2012 dated 16.10.2012 from Ministry of Corporate Affairs ( Para, Line 4) is pathetic.

It is unfortunate that professionals have certified the authenticity of such incorrect data (XBRL filing of financial statements), for which they are liable to be penalized. Such lapses defeat the very purpose of introducing XBRL filings which are meant to elicit more detailed and refined information as to the affairs of companies. Please note that XBRL filings are being minutely scrutinized to see if similar mistakes also appear in a larger sample."

‘It is bounden duty of Institutes to direct its members to take necessary steps to improve the quality of XBRL filing for FY 2011-12 to be undertaken by its members. The Institute may conduct further trainings, issue guidelines, etc. so that such quality related issues are appropriately resolved’

In conclusion of the circular, it is requested that (Para 5) ‘This may be accorded high priority’.

Why  the members are not able to improve the quality of XBRL Filing?     

a. Lack of Interest.

b. Lack of Awareness.    

c. Lack of collaborative approach among themselves.     

d. Complacency  about what we know in the profession.

Why do not we discuss among ourselves and share our knowledge?

Unless we share the knowledge what we know, what we have among ourselves how do we know where we stand in the profession?       

This is the classic example.     

We must take it seriously, and we must regularly and constantly discuss and share the information among ourselves, if we want to stay afloat in the profession.

If we do not discuss, if we do not talk, if we do not share what we know, what we have among ourselves, and get rectified, get corrected, get updated, we will face similar awkward situation and get admonished.

Whatever may it be the reason, we may pass on the buck on something else. How long?

Members of both Institutes need  to take it serious as MCA does not want to see very purpose of XBRL gets defeated.

Sorry, for the state.

Venkateswara Rao Sapare




Category Corporate Law, Other Articles by - Venkateswara Rao Sapare 



Comments


update