Ind AS vs IFRS differences in presentation

Key practical differences accountants must know

For day‑to‑day work, accountants mainly feel Ind AS vs IFRS differences in presentation, judgement, and a few specific areas like real estate, leases, financial instruments, and disclosures.

1. Presentation & Format

Ind AS prescribes specific formats aligned with Companies Act (Schedule III) and prohibits “extraordinary items”, so classification and line‑items are more rigid in practice.

IFRS allows more flexible statement formats (e.g., one or two statements of profit and loss + OCI), so migrating between the two often means re‑mapping and regrouping items.

2. Substance vs Legal Form

IFRS pushes hard on substance over form, so structures that legally avoid control or debt may still be consolidated or treated as liabilities.

Ind AS follows substance too, but is more influenced by Indian legal/regulatory form (e.g., some control and consolidation assessments, certain instruments shaped by local law), so you must check MCA/ICAI guidance and not just copy IFRS practice.

3. Revenue (Ind AS 115 vs IFRS 15)

Model is the same 5‑step control model, but Ind AS adds India‑specific guidance and exceptions (especially for real estate, construction‑type contracts, and multi‑element arrangements), which can shift timing of revenue for developers and EPC companies.

Practically: you may see percentage‑of‑completion vs point‑in‑time differences, and extra disclosure requirements in Indian financials versus overseas IFRS sets.

4. Leases (Ind AS 116 vs IFRS 16)

Both bring almost all leases on balance sheet for lessees (ROU asset + lease liability), but Ind AS 116 includes extra guidance and practical expedients tailored to Indian leasing patterns.

Ratios: leverage, EBITDA, and interest coverage will broadly move the same way, yet some borderline contracts may be treated slightly differently due to Indian regulatory interpretations.

5. Financial Instruments & Fair Value

Framework (Ind AS 109 vs IFRS 9) is aligned, but Ind AS tends to be a bit more conservative on fair value and carries India‑specific rules on classification, impairment, and tax effects.

For banks/NBFCs and NBFC‑like entities, local RBI/SEBI guidance plus Ind AS often mean more detailed ECL and disclosure requirements than a “plain IFRS 9” implementation in some foreign groups.

6. Consolidation & Control

Both require consolidation of subsidiaries, but there are subtle differences in defining control (potential voting rights, protective rights, de‑facto control) that can cause a subsidiary under IFRS to be unconsolidated or differently presented under Ind AS, or vice versa.

In groups with foreign parents, accountants often prepare two versions: one Ind AS set for Indian statutory filing and one IFRS package for group reporting, with reconciliation schedules.

7. Disclosures & Compliance Burden

Ind AS generally demands very detailed disclosures (risk, related parties, reconciliations, transition) driven by MCA/ICAI and Indian regulators.

IFRS disclosures are also heavy, but the exact checklists differ; in practice, Indian statutory FS under Ind AS can be more “form‑driven”, while IFRS packages for MNC parents are more “policy‑driven”.

If you say whether your focus is exams (CA/ACCA), statutory audits, or group reporting for an MNC, a tailored 1‑page “working cheat sheet” of these practical differences can be drafted for your blog or personal use.