the company has a returns policy allowing a customer to return goods within 28 days of purchase if they are dissatisfied with the product.
For this risk, if I write that if the company has not accounted for the refund liability or recognise the refund liability, revenue will be overstated and the refund liability understated.
Is this correct or should I write
If the company has not "correctly" accounted for the refund liability revenue will be overstated and the refund liability understated
Which one is correct and better as an explanation
Should the word correctly be included
Ask the Tutor ACCA AA
ifrs 15
2y ago#1This level of semantics is not important in passing the AA exam.
So are both explanations correct for this risk
The second explanation is what is written in the kit
This is the march21/june21 question
2y ago#3As I indicated here https://opentuition.com/topic/finance-costs-5 inclusion of "correctly" gives emphasis but does not really change meaning?
I ask a passer-by:
1. "Do you have the time?"
2. "Do you have the correct time?"
In context "correct" is implicit in 1 (why would I be asking for a time other than the correct time?) just as "now" is implicit (the passer-by can only give me the time at this point in time!)
Sign into reply to this topic.