Leases are a critical financing and asset procurement tool in modern business. They enable entities to acquire and use high-value assets without an immediate transfer of ownership. The accounting treatment of leases plays a vital role in ensuring faithful representation of such transactions in financial statements. In India, lease accounting is governed by Accounting Standard (AS) 19 for entities not covered under Ind AS, and by Ind AS 116 for companies following Ind AS framework.
This article provides an in-depth comparative study of AS 19 and Ind AS 116, examines the underlying concepts, explores complexities through real-life examples, and analyses their implications on financial reporting.
1. Evolution and Context of Lease Accounting
Lease accounting has evolved significantly over the last two decades. AS 19 was introduced by the ICAI with effect from April 1, 2001, based on the earlier IAS 17. It focused on the classification of leases into finance leases and operating leases, with accounting treatment based on the transfer of risks and rewards incidental to ownership.
In contrast, Ind AS 116, converged with IFRS 16, became applicable from April 1, 2019. This standard introduced a paradigm shift by eliminating the operating lease classification for lessees, replacing it with a single lessee accounting model based on the recognition of a right-of-use asset and a lease liability.
2. Fundamental Concepts Underlying AS 19
AS 19’s foundation lies in the concept of substance over form — the economic reality of the transaction should dictate accounting treatment, rather than merely its legal form.
Two categories of leases are defined:
– Finance Lease: A lease that transfers substantially all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership to the lessee.
– Operating Lease: Any lease other than a finance lease.
Indicators of a finance lease under AS 19 include:
1. Transfer of ownership by the end of the lease term.
2. Presence of a bargain purchase option.
3. Lease term constituting a major part of the asset’s useful life.
4. Present value of minimum lease payments substantially covering the asset’s fair value.
3. Recognition and Measurement – AS 19
For lessees under a finance lease: The asset and corresponding liability are recognized at the lower of the fair value and the present value of minimum lease payments. Depreciation is charged over the shorter of the lease term or useful life.
For lessors in a finance lease: The net investment in the lease is recognized as a receivable, with finance income allocated to periods to reflect a constant periodic return.
Operating leases involve recognizing lease rentals as income or expense on a straight-line basis over the lease term, unless another systematic basis is more representative.
4. Ind AS 116 – Control-Based Single Lessee Model
Ind AS 116 defines a lease as a contract that conveys the right to control the use of an identified asset for a period of time in exchange for consideration.
Key features:
– Recognition of Right-of-Use (ROU) asset and Lease Liability for all leases (except short-term and low-value exemptions).
– Measurement of lease liability at the present value of lease payments, discounted using the interest rate implicit in the lease or the incremental borrowing rate.
– ROU asset measured at cost, comprising the initial lease liability, lease payments made before commencement, and initial direct costs.
Depreciation is charged on the ROU asset, and interest expense is recognized on the lease liability.
5. Comparative Analysis of AS 19 and Ind AS 116
Under AS 19, lessees could keep operating leases off the balance sheet, leading to potentially understated liabilities and overstated return ratios.
Ind AS 116 eliminates this by bringing most leases on-balance sheet, enhancing transparency.
The basis for classification differs: AS 19 uses risks-and-rewards transfer, while Ind AS 116 uses control assessment.
Impact on financial statements: Ind AS 116 leads to higher EBITDA for lessees because lease expenses are split into depreciation and interest.
6. Complexities in Application
1. Lease Modifications: Under Ind AS 116, modifications require remeasurement of lease liability, with adjustments to the ROU asset. AS 19 had limited guidance here.
2. Embedded Leases: Identifying leases in service contracts is challenging under Ind AS 116 due to control assessment requirements.
3. Discount Rate Estimation: Under Ind AS 116, determining the incremental borrowing rate is critical and subjective.
4. Sale and Leaseback: Under Ind AS 116, recognition depends on whether transfer qualifies as a sale under Ind AS 115; AS 19 focused more on risk transfer.
7. Practical Illustration
Case: ABC Ltd. enters a 5-year lease for industrial equipment, with annual payments of ₹10 lakh. Fair value: ₹42 lakh, useful life: 6 years.
AS 19:
– Classify as finance lease if PV of payments ≈ fair value.
– Recognize asset and liability at ₹40 lakh.
– Depreciate over 5 years; recognize finance cost using IRR.
Ind AS 116:
– Recognize ROU asset at ₹40 lakh and liability at PV of payments.
– Depreciate ROU asset over 5 years.
– Interest expense recognized separately, leading to front-loaded expense profile.
8. Conclusion
While AS 19 focuses on risk-and-reward transfer, Ind AS 116 is based on control. The latter significantly changes lease accounting for lessees, leading to greater transparency but also greater complexity. Entities must invest in systems to track lease data and ensure compliance, especially with respect to judgments in classification, measurement, and modifications.
Author Bio
