02-17-2010, 12:47 AM
Shoaib,
I did not find or anticipate you as an âignorantâ because you are an aspirant student and well trained in practical terms as well. I don't know where you found this for yourself. However, the ones who are not ignorant and (also not been deemed as such by any one) should also come up with suggestions. Of course we can be deficient or wrong in our explanation but we have to sort it out as well; so must give it a try. We can get knowledge from each other only by exchanging our viewpoint.
This is what I wrote about you from which you got wrong meanings. Anyway, this is nothing to be discussed any further. I donât also wish to discuss about your âbeating about the bushâ stuff that has arisen as a result of different understanding of what I wanted to communicate.
First of all I accept that the developing (and under-developed) nations always look forward the developments of others and oftenly accept and implement the pronouncements âas it isâ without any brain storming locally. However, fortunately, in case of IFACâs pronouncements the case is little different. I appreciate the matter raised by Ahmed since it is offering an opportunity to know something deeply.
I have to visit some one at this very moment, so I will again try to clarify the question in further detail in tomorrow. So, please bear with me and donât go where things are ruined.
Until then, just a food for thought; the definition of borrowing costs given by IAS-23 includes the Finance Charge in respect of finance lease. Whether or not this borrowing cost is eligible for capitalization will be discussed tomorrow. I will also try to explain (to the extent of my understanding) that why borrowing cost is âonlyâ allowed to be capitalized in Qualifying Assets âonlyâ during the period of their construction. Whether or not IFRSs discuss or cover the matter raised by Ahmed, will also be discussed.
Yes, of course why the borrowing cost specific to non-qualifying assets is out of the ambit of capitalization activity, and is an operational/performance item, will also be pondered upon.
In the mean while it will be good for us if you share your view point and suggest some answer of the query.
Regards
Kamran.
I did not find or anticipate you as an âignorantâ because you are an aspirant student and well trained in practical terms as well. I don't know where you found this for yourself. However, the ones who are not ignorant and (also not been deemed as such by any one) should also come up with suggestions. Of course we can be deficient or wrong in our explanation but we have to sort it out as well; so must give it a try. We can get knowledge from each other only by exchanging our viewpoint.
This is what I wrote about you from which you got wrong meanings. Anyway, this is nothing to be discussed any further. I donât also wish to discuss about your âbeating about the bushâ stuff that has arisen as a result of different understanding of what I wanted to communicate.
First of all I accept that the developing (and under-developed) nations always look forward the developments of others and oftenly accept and implement the pronouncements âas it isâ without any brain storming locally. However, fortunately, in case of IFACâs pronouncements the case is little different. I appreciate the matter raised by Ahmed since it is offering an opportunity to know something deeply.
I have to visit some one at this very moment, so I will again try to clarify the question in further detail in tomorrow. So, please bear with me and donât go where things are ruined.
Until then, just a food for thought; the definition of borrowing costs given by IAS-23 includes the Finance Charge in respect of finance lease. Whether or not this borrowing cost is eligible for capitalization will be discussed tomorrow. I will also try to explain (to the extent of my understanding) that why borrowing cost is âonlyâ allowed to be capitalized in Qualifying Assets âonlyâ during the period of their construction. Whether or not IFRSs discuss or cover the matter raised by Ahmed, will also be discussed.
Yes, of course why the borrowing cost specific to non-qualifying assets is out of the ambit of capitalization activity, and is an operational/performance item, will also be pondered upon.
In the mean while it will be good for us if you share your view point and suggest some answer of the query.
Regards
Kamran.
