AS 29 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets: A Practitioner Guide for FY 2026-27
AS 29 (Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets) is the Indian Accounting Standard that prescribes when an enterprise must recognise provisions and disclose contingent liabilities or contingent assets.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) issued AS 29 under the Companies (Accounting Standards) Rules, 2006 (reaffirmed in the Companies (Accounting Standards) Rules, 2021). It became mandatory for Level I enterprises from 1 April 2004. AS 29 superseded the contingencies portion of AS 4.
For FY 2026-27, AS 29 remains a critical standard for all non-Ind AS companies. In the manufacturing sector, most Level I and II enterprises use AS 29 to account for warranty and litigation provisions without discounting, unlike Ind AS-applicable peers.
AS 29 at a Glance
AS 29 sets out how enterprises must recognise provisions and disclose contingent liabilities or contingent assets in their financial statements. Its core principle is to ensure obligations arising from past events are measured reliably. The primary users are Level I, II, and III companies not following Ind AS.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Standard Number | AS 29 |
| Full Name | Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets |
| Issuing Body | ICAI (Accounting Standards Board) |
| Notified By | MCA, Companies (Accounting Standards) Rules, 2006 (reaffirmed in Companies (Accounting Standards) Rules, 2021) |
| Effective Date | 1 April 2004 for Level I enterprises |
| Supersedes | Replaced the contingencies portion of AS 4 |
| Equivalent Standard | AS 29 ↔ Ind AS 37 ↔ IAS 37 |
| Applies To | All Level I, II, and III enterprises preparing financial statements under the Accounting Standards framework. Ind AS-applicable companies follow Ind AS 37 instead. |
What is AS 29: Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets?
AS 29 defines when an enterprise must recognise provisions as liabilities arising from uncertain timing or amount and when it should disclose contingent liabilities or contingent assets that depend on future events.
The ICAI introduced this standard to ensure consistency in accounting for obligations that are not certain in timing or amount. Before its introduction in India from April 2004, such matters were governed by a section of AS 4. The approach aligns with international best practices through convergence with IAS/IFRS standards.
Finance teams in Indian companies rely on this standard to determine what goes on the balance sheet as a provision versus what gets disclosed as a contingency.
Objective of AS 29
- Prescribe accounting for provisions, contingent liabilities, and contingent assets to ensure consistent recognition, measurement, and disclosure.
- Distinguish between provisions (recognised obligations with uncertainty about timing or amount) and contingent liabilities (not recognised but disclosed).
- Establish disclosure requirements so users understand the nature, timing, and amount of provisions or contingencies.
The objective supports true and fair presentation as required by Section 129 of the Companies Act, 2013. Proper application ensures stakeholders receive reliable information about uncertain obligations facing an enterprise.
Who Must Apply AS 29?
Entities covered
| Entity Category | Applicability |
|---|---|
| Level I Enterprises | Mandatory |
| Level II Enterprises | Mandatory |
| Level III Enterprises | Mandatory |
| Ind AS Phase I/II/III | Not applicable, follow Ind AS 37 |
All non-Ind AS companies preparing financial statements under the Accounting Standards framework must apply AS 29. Listed companies following Ind AS apply Ind AS 37 instead.
Scope exclusions
AS 29 does not apply to:
- Provisions or contingent liabilities from financial instruments measured at fair value
- Executory contracts unless onerous
- Items governed by other Accounting Standards:
- Construction contracts (AS 7)
- Employee benefits obligations (AS 15)
- Taxation-related provisions (AS 22)
- Intangible assets impairment/losses (AS 26)
When the standard does not apply
Financial instrument-related provisions are covered by relevant standards on financial instruments. Employee benefit obligations fall under AS 15. Taxation matters are addressed in AS 22. Construction contract losses are primarily addressed by AS 7 with some overlap for onerous contracts.
Key Definitions under AS 29
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Provision | Liability measurable only by substantial estimation |
| Liability | Present obligation from past events; settlement expected to cause outflow of resources |
| Contingent liability | Possible obligation confirmed only by future events outside enterprise control; or present obligation not recognised due to lack of probability or reliable estimate |
| Contingent asset | Possible asset confirmed only by future events outside enterprise control |
| Obligating event | Event creating legal or constructive obligation leaving no realistic alternative but settlement |
| Restructuring | Planned programme materially changing business scope or manner |
Recognition and Measurement under AS 29
When to recognise
An enterprise recognises a provision when all three criteria are met:
There is a present obligation as a result of a past event.
It is probable that settling this obligation will require an outflow of resources.
A reliable estimate can be made of the amount required.
A present obligation may arise from legal requirements or from constructive obligations based on established practices or published policies. However, compared to Ind AS 37's broader approach to constructive obligations, recognition under AS 29 is more restrictive, legal enforceability often dominates recognition decisions.
If it is not probable that an outflow will be needed or if no reliable estimate can be made but there is still possible risk exposure (and outflow is not remote), disclosure as a contingent liability becomes necessary rather than recognition as a provision.
Initial measurement
The amount recognised as a provision equals the best estimate required to settle the present obligation at balance sheet date (Para 35). For large populations of similar obligations, such as warranty claims, the expected value method applies:
**Provision = Expected number of claims × Average cost per claim**
For single obligations, such as litigation, the most likely outcome may be used if more appropriate than an expected value calculation.
No provision is recognised for future operating losses because these do not arise from past obligating events.
Subsequent measurement
Provisions must be reviewed at each balance sheet date. The entity adjusts them to reflect current best estimates based on new information or experience. If it becomes clear that no outflow will be required for all or part of a previously recognised provision, such as when litigation resolves in favour, the entity reverses that portion through profit or loss.
Crucially, discounting is prohibited under Para 35; all amounts are presented at their undiscounted values even if settlement occurs over several years. This differs fundamentally from Ind AS 37 where discounting is mandatory if time value is material.
A provision may only be used against expenditures originally provided for, not general business risks nor unrelated costs.
AS 29 Approach - No Discounting and Constructive Obligation Differences
Under Para 35 of AS 29:
**No discounting:** All provisions are measured at undiscounted amounts regardless of timing until paid out.
Constructive obligations receive limited treatment, an obligating event requires either legal enforceability or strong evidence that published policies have created valid expectations among affected parties. Onerous contract guidance exists but lacks detail compared with Ind AS 37's comprehensive approach; companies should refer back to contract terms before recognising such provisions.
For restructuring costs (Para 71-79), recognition requires both a detailed formal plan approved by appropriate authority and either commencement of implementation or announcement creating valid expectation among those affected. General operating costs such as retraining remaining staff do not qualify for provision treatment, they remain future expenses unless directly tied to restructuring plan execution.
In our audit practice we frequently observe confusion regarding discount rates, under AS 29 these have no place in computation; only actual expected cash flows matter at face value.
Worked Examples on AS 29
Example 1: Warranty provision under AS 29
Krishna Manufacturing Ltd sells consumer durables with a two-year warranty period. In FY 2025-26 it records sales worth Rs 50 crore. Based on prior experience, a claim ratio of four percent with average cost per claim Rs 600, the company estimates total claims at Rs 2 crore over two years following sale closure.
Computation Table
| Item | Amount / Rate | Computation / Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Total sales | Rs 50 crore | FY 2025-26 |
| Expected claim ratio | Four percent | Past experience |
| Estimated claims | Rs 2 crore | Rs 50 crore × four percent |
Journal Entry
Dr Warranty Expense (P&L) Rs 2 crore
Cr Warranty Provision Rs 2 crore
As claims arise over two years post-sale closure, the company utilises this provision against actual payouts without discount adjustment since discounting is prohibited by Para 35.
Example 2: Restructuring provision
Sundaram Engineering Pvt Ltd’s board approves closure of one division on February 28th 2026 after preparing a formal plan detailing severance payments totalling Rs 5 crore plus other direct closure costs Rs 2 crore. On March 1st 2026 management communicates details publicly, including affected employees, and commits closure by July 2026.
Computation Table
| Cost Component | Amount | Included in Provision? |
|---|---|---|
| Severance payments | Rs 5 crore | Yes |
| Other direct costs | Rs 2 crore | Yes |
| Relocation/retraining costs | Excluded | Not included per Para 76 |
Total restructuring provision = Rs 7 crore
(Rs 5 crore severance + Rs 2 crore other direct costs)
Journal Entry
Dr Restructuring Expense (P&L) Rs 7 crore
Cr Restructuring Provision Rs 7 crore
Provision drawn down progressively as restructuring steps are implemented; excluded items remain unprovided future operating expenses per Para 76.
Disclosure Requirements under AS 29
Disclosures under AS 29 are critical for compliance with Schedule III to the Companies Act, 2013. They ensure users of financial statements understand the nature, timing, and magnitude of provisions, contingent liabilities, and contingent assets. Accurate disclosure supports transparency and enables auditors to form an opinion under SA 700.
| Item | Requirement | Para Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Carrying amount of provisions | Brief description of nature of obligation and reconciliation of opening and closing balances | Para 66, 67 |
| Brief description of nature of obligation | Indication of uncertainties about timing and amount of outflows | Para 67 |
| Contingent liabilities | Brief description, estimated financial effect, indication of uncertainties | Para 68 |
| Contingent assets | Disclosure usually made in approving authority's report when inflow probable; not in financial statements per se | Para 70 |
| Major assumptions | Concerning future events | Para 67(b) |
| Reimbursement expected | Where applicable | Para 67(c) |
Auditors must verify these disclosures are complete and accurate as part of their reporting responsibilities under SA 700.
Common Mistakes & Industry-Specific Considerations
Common errors auditors flag
- Recognising provision for general business risks or future operating losses (not permitted under AS 29 either)
- Discounting AS 29 provisions (prohibited; differs from Ind AS 37)
- Failing to disclose material contingent liabilities (frequently flagged in audit findings)
- Restructuring provision recognised before formal plan and communication
- Inadequate disclosure of major assumptions in provision estimation
- Confusing AS 29 with the contingencies portion of AS 4 (which AS 29 superseded since 1 April 2004)
Industry application notes
Most non-Ind AS Level I and II manufacturing enterprises apply AS 29. Warranty, environmental, and litigation provisions are common. The prohibition on discounting simplifies measurement compared to Ind AS 37.
For power and utilities companies following the Accounting Standards framework, asset retirement obligations such as decommissioning are measured at undiscounted cost under AS 29. This is a significant difference from Ind AS-applying peers.
Public sector undertakings (PSUs) that follow the Accounting Standards framework often have extensive contingent liability disclosures arising from court cases. These disclosures are aligned with Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) audit observations and Public Accounts Committee requirements.
AS 29 vs Ind AS 37 vs IFRS: Key Differences
The table below compares key aspects of AS 29, Ind AS 37, and IFRS (IAS 37):
| Aspect | AS | Ind AS | IFRS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recognition threshold | Probable | Probable (more likely than not) | Probable |
| Discounting requirement | Prohibited (Para 35) | Required if material | Required if material |
| Constructive obligations | Limited treatment | Comprehensive (Para 17) | Same as Ind AS |
| Onerous contracts | Limited specific guidance | Comprehensive Para 66-69 | Same as Ind AS |
| Restructuring provisions | Para 71-79 | Para 70-83 | Substantively similar |
India’s carve-outs from IFRS for this topic primarily relate to the prohibition on discounting provisions under AS 29. Constructive obligations also receive narrower treatment. These differences can lead to significant divergence in reported liabilities between Indian GAAP and Ind AS/IFRS-compliant companies.
Latest Amendments to AS 29 (FY 2026-27)
No amendments have been notified to AS 29 for FY 2026-27 as of 2026-05-02. The standard continues to apply in its existing form.
Related Standards You Should Know
- [Ind AS 37](/ind-as-37-provisions-contingencies/), Equivalent provisions standard for Ind AS-applicable companies; requires discounting where AS 29 prohibits.
- [AS 4](/as-4-contingencies-events-after-bs/), Contingencies portion of AS 4 superseded by AS 29 since 1 April 2004.
- [AS 22](/as-22-accounting-for-taxes-on-income/), Tax provisions under AS 22, not AS 29.
- [AS 15](/as-15-employee-benefits/), Employee benefits obligations - separate framework.
- [AS 7](/as-7-construction-contracts/), Construction contracts - loss-making contracts under AS 7 supplemented by AS 29 onerous contract analysis.
Need Help with AS 29 Compliance?
Patron Accounting LLP supports Indian enterprises with all aspects of compliance under AS 29 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets. Our technical team brings decades of experience across statutory audit, financial reporting, and regulatory disclosure.
Our services include:
- Statutory Audit
- Financial Reporting & Schedule III
- Disclosure Review
- Ind AS Advisory
Schedule a 30-minute consultation with our Ind AS team, Pune · Mumbai · Delhi · Gurugram.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
All Level I, II, and III enterprises preparing financial statements under the Accounting Standards framework must comply with AS 29. Companies required to follow Ind AS must instead apply Ind AS 37 for provisions and contingencies.
A provision is a present obligation arising from past events where an outflow is probable and can be reliably estimated. A contingent liability is either a possible obligation or a present obligation where an outflow is not probable or cannot be reliably estimated.
Under AS 29, discounting future cash flows when measuring provisions is prohibited even if settlement occurs over several years. In contrast, Ind AS 37 requires discounting if the time value of money is material to the measurement.
An enterprise must have a detailed formal plan approved by appropriate authority and either start implementing it or announce its main features publicly so affected parties have valid expectation that restructuring will occur.
No. Future operating losses do not arise from past obligating events; therefore, they cannot be recognised as provisions under any circumstances according to the requirements of AS 29.
Warranty obligations are recognised as a provision if based on past experience it is probable claims will arise and the amount can be reliably estimated. The provision is measured at undiscounted expected cost at balance sheet date.
Constructive obligation refers to situations where an enterprise creates valid expectations among affected parties through published policies or established practices but recognition threshold is higher than in Ind AS 37 due to limited treatment in Indian GAAP.
Legal disputes result in a provision only if there is a present obligation arising from past events, an outflow is probable, and a reliable estimate can be made. Otherwise they are disclosed as contingent liabilities if not remote.
Contingent assets are generally disclosed in the approving authority’s report when inflow becomes probable but are not presented within the main financial statements themselves per Para 70 of the standard.
About This Article
Reviewed by CA & CS Team · Patron Accounting LLP
Technical reviewer: CA Sundram Gupta, FCA
Last reviewed: 2026-05-02
Sources: ICAI Compendium of Accounting Standards · MCA Notification (Companies (Accounting Standards) Rules, 2006 (reaffirmed in Companies (Accounting Standards) Rules, 2021)) · IFRS Foundation