Ca final november 2013 result challenged in madras highcourt

Its a good step.... Atleast it will ensure the results in upcoming exams to be better.

My Friends. Answers given in Suggested are so much lengthy, and examiners are instructed to match the same with answer sheets. You can see May, 2013 Audit question 1st, for 5 marks of each,r so much material has been explained. And examiners are making CAs who are adopting copy or ditto answers approach. In professional exams students' knowledge should be tested instead of standing wrong because the answer is not as per format in study material and suggested answers. This is the approrach why the students are fail on the fit of suggested answers.

 

The answers given in suggested answers especially SFM suggested answers are incorrect. And we have been marked on the basis of it. Some discrepencies noticed are: 1.Gordon model formula is wrongly written.It takes D=current year dividend WHEREAS D=expected dividend as per formula devised by gordon. 2.The institute takes cost of capital as discounting factor for leasing decision WHEREAS our sir Rajiv singh sir clearly told us that cost of capital can never be DF for a leasing/borrowing decision as it is a financing decision and not investment decision. 3.In forex questions,the institute goes against ACI convention repeatedly. 4.The way we have been marked in audit and law paper is a question mark in itself.4 out of 8 and 1 out of 4. WHAT STANDARDS IS THE INSTITUTE TALKING ABOUT WHEN ITS OWN CONCEPTS ARE NOT CLEAR??

FINALLY WHAT HAPPANED IN THIS CASE?