CA Pankaj Aswani - Inter

Dear Sir/Ma’am,

I hope this email finds you well. I wish to respectfully submit my representation regarding certain ambiguities and concerns observed in the CA Intermediate January 2026 Financial Management & Strategic Management Examination, which may kindly be considered at the time of evaluation.

1. Question 1(b) – Factoring / Receivables Financing

The question stated that “the factor will provide an advance of 85% of receivables, after keeping 15% as reserve.”

Based on the pattern consistently followed in ICAI questions:

(i) Where reserve is mentioned separately, the usual approach is: Average Receivables - Commission - Reserve = Amount available for advance, and interest is calculated on this amount and deducted from this to arrive at net advance, as followed in past ICAI examination questions.

(ii) Where only percentage of advance is specified, the net advance is directly computed by applying the given percentage on receivables without any further deductions, as seen in RTP December 2021 and MTP 2 for May 2023.

In the present question, both wordings were used simultaneously, which reasonably led to two possible interpretations and solution approaches.

In view of the above, I humbly request that both logically valid approaches may kindly be considered correct for evaluation purposes.

2. Question 3(a) – External Funds Requirement (EFR)

(Use the following paragraph ONLY if Question 3(a) was NOT attempted)

The question involved computation of External Funds Requirement (EFR) and its sources, which are concepts primarily covered at the CA Final (AFM) level and are not specifically covered under the CA Intermediate syllabus. Due to this syllabus-related uncertainty, many students, including myself, refrained from attempting the question despite adequate preparation.

Considering the significant weightage of 8 marks, I respectfully request ICAI to kindly consider awarding appropriate grace marks for Question No. 3(a) in the interest of students.

(Use the following paragraph ONLY if Question 3(a) was attempted)

The question involved computation of External Funds Requirement (EFR) and its sources, which are concepts primarily covered at the CA Final (AFM) level and are not specifically covered under the CA Intermediate syllabus. Although I attempted the question, I was unable to solve it satisfactorily despite adequate preparation of the relevant syllabus, including the Ratio Analysis chapter, due to the unfamiliar nature of the concept.

Considering the significant weightage of 8 marks, I respectfully request ICAI to kindly consider awarding appropriate grace marks for Question No. 3(a) in the interest of students.

3. FM Case Scenario – Cost of Convertible Debentures and WACC MCQs

(Use the following paragraph ONLY if the two MCQs were left unattempted)

One MCQ in the FM Case Scenario required computation of Cost of Convertible Debentures using the approximation method. In the absence of explicit information, it is a standard and widely accepted ICAI practice to assume Issue Price to be equal to the Current Market Price, which then forms the basis for calculating net proceeds, as consistently followed in several ICAI questions, for example, September 2024, January 2025 and May 2024 examinations, as well as various RTPs.

However, no option corresponding to the value derived using this assumption was available, which caused significant confusion and ultimately led me to leave this MCQ unattempted. Since the subsequent MCQ on Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) depended on this cost, I was also unable to attempt that question, resulting in a loss of 4 marks in total.

I respectfully request ICAI to kindly consider awarding appropriate grace marks for these two MCQs.

(Use the following paragraph ONLY if incorrect options were selected)

One MCQ in the FM Case Scenario required computation of Cost of Convertible Debentures using the approximation method.

❤10

1.56K viewsedited 14:09