We use cookies to understand which pages and tools are useful, nothing more — no ad tracking across other sites. You can change this later from the footer.

Skip to content
Lekhya.in

Explainer2 min readPublished

Why investment property fair value disclosure gets skipped even when the standard requires it

Ind AS 40 lets a company carry investment property at cost, but still requires the fair value to be disclosed in a note either way — a requirement that's easy to assume applies only to companies using the fair value model.

Investment property fair value disclosure gets skipped because of a straightforward but costly misreading of Ind AS 40: a company applying the cost model doesn't have to remeasure the property's carrying value to fair value each period, but it is still separately required to disclose the fair value in the notes, every period, and preparers who equate "we use the cost model" with "fair value disclosure doesn't apply to us" drop a requirement that was never actually conditional on which measurement model was chosen.

Why the confusion is so persistent

  • The fair value model and the fair value disclosure requirement share the same words, making it easy to assume one implies exemption from the other if you're not using it.
  • Obtaining a fair value for disclosure purposes under the cost model still typically requires an external valuation, which costs money and effort that's easy to treat as optional if no one specifically flags the requirement.
  • A property that hasn't changed hands or been revalued in years creates a false sense that its fair value is "the same as cost" and therefore not worth separately disclosing.
  • Smaller companies without a dedicated valuation function may simply not know the disclosure exists independently of the measurement model choice.

Regulatory requirement

Ind AS 40 requires disclosure of the fair value of investment property regardless of whether the cost model or the fair value model is used for measurement — under the cost model, this is a note disclosure only, with no impact on the carrying value or the P&L, but it is not optional.

What this means in practice

A company carrying investment property at cost still needs a current fair value estimate — typically from an external valuer, following Ind AS 113's fair value hierarchy — specifically to support the note disclosure, even when that fair value changes nothing about how the asset sits on the balance sheet.

This is practical guidance written for audit teams, not an authoritative statement of any standard or statute. Standards, forms and timelines change. Check the current text issued by the ICAI and the relevant authority before relying on anything here in an audit file.

Free tools, no signup

Each one reads a file entirely in your browser — or, for two of them, just answers a few questions — and nothing is ever uploaded.