1. INTRODUCTION:

Changes in the price levels cause two types of economic conditions, one is Inflation and another is Deflation. Inflation may be defined as period of general increase in the prices involve in the factors of production whereas deflation cause fall in the general price level. These changes in the price level lead to inaccurate presentation of financial statement which otherwise are prepared to present in true and fair view of the company’s financial health. This is so because the financial statements are prepared on the basis of historical costs. In India the financial statements use to present according to actual and cost concept. On historical costs on the assumption that the unit of account i.e. rupee has static value. The purchasing power use to change by the passes of time, in India the purchasing power of the rupee is changing and it’s rising continuously.

Hence it is clear that the measurement unit of various transactions i.e. money relate to different points of time. But the value of money does remain constant over a period of time; it has different values in different point of time due to changes in the price levels. So we use to compare two unlike things the past and present figures of the financial statements without taking in into consideration of the price levels changes. The profit or loss arrived from these transactions will not reveal a true picture. It is generally said that profits that arrived from profit and loss account on the basis of historical cost has a tendency to overstate due to rise in price level. This is do because during inflation the selling prices would indicate the value realized in terms of increase prices but the costs which pertain to the earlier period shows the lower value. So the various expenses incurred, income earned, assets acquired and liabilities incurred use to shown in different financial statement has different value during inflation period.

In the past few years of high inflation, companies have reported very high profits on the one hand but on the other they have faced real financial difficulties. This is so because in reality dividend and taxes have been paid out of capital due to overstated profits arrived by adopting the historical cost concept. Thus a change from historical cost concept to price level or inflation accounting has been recommended.

These estimates of profits can have several further effects. When these reported profits are used as the basis of corporate profits taxes to the government, it leads to larger tax payments, and the government can become an important beneficiary of inflation. Furthermore, if reported profits are used as a basis of corporate decision making the companies may not be setting prices sufficiently high to ensure an adequate rate of return on a long-term basis, if they have some scope for pricing policies. In addition, dividends may be paid out to an excessive degree and thereby they might not have an adequate level of internal reserves to maintain their real resources intact.The effect of inflation on the interpretative value of financial statements is much pronounced and it is more frequently put forward as an argument in favour of devaluation from the existing historical cost accounting' system.

It has been pointed above that profit under Historical Cost Based Method (HBC method) is overstated as compared to Current Purchase Power Method (CPP method) because of undercharging of depreciation and materials cost to the profit and loss accounts. To examine this, the present study summarizes and analyzes the profit and loss accounts of sample companies under both HCB as well as CPP method. This study attempts to make a comparative analysis of reported and inflated business performance.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW:

SinhaS. L. N. (1974), in his study on the Impact of Inflation on Company Finance' noted that with respect to the Reserve Bank study of 350 companies in the three years from 1971 to 1973 suggests that with the impact of inflation the profit before tax rose. To conclude, these companies could not take benefit of the inflationary price rise in the country and thus a strong case for adjusting company accounts on the basis of historical values to their current prices emerges to show a more realistic picture. Gupta R. andBhandari L. C. (1978),this article is to measure the impact of inflation on reported profits and relevant financial ratios. The earnings of 57 companies covering 9 industries have been restated for a period of 7 years (1970-1976). The study shows that the impact of inflation on individual companies and industry groups varies greatly. The result emphasizes the differential effects on companies with varying inflation rates. The effects of restatement on dividend payout and tax burden have been suitably highlighted. Gupta Ramesh (1978) in his working paper “A Case Study of the Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.” reviewed the recent developments in inflation accounting as well as the role played by the accounting professional bodies in the U.K., U.S.A and in India. In this paper, a detailed study of the BHEL Current Cost Accounts (CCA) for the year 1976-77 has been made. The BHEL profitability on historical cost and CCA basis has been evaluated during this period and found the understatement of profits. Arie Baran, Josef Lakonishokand Aharon R.(1980) had discussed in their article entitled "The Information Content of General Price Level Adjusted Earnings: Some Empirical Evidence" in the year 1980 that general price level restated data contain information not included in currently available historical cost data. The results obtained in this study appear to support the hypothesis that price level restated data contain information which is not included in the financial reports currently available.

William C. Norby (1981), this article “Inflation Accounting Information, The SAXE Lecture in Accounting” was related to the impact of inflation accounting adjustments on companies and industry groups for investment decisions; and demonstrate managerial uses of inflation accounting for internal control as well as strategic decisions. The analysis was based primarily on covering the eight year period 1972-1980, and concluded with an appraisal of the advantages and limitation of inflation accounting for practical decision-making. D. J. Daly (1982), in the article “Inflation, Inflation Accounting and its Effect, Canadian Manufacturing, 1966-82”, provides estimates of the effects of inflation in Canada on the reported rate of return in manufacturing firms from 1966 to 1982. Comparisons are made with similar studies for the United Kingdom. Such studies show that reported profits are overstated and total assets are undervalued during and after periods of inflation. Nunley, Terry James (l983),in his thesis; Effects of Changing Pieces be audited, has studied that the FASB has indicated that it will reconsider the present requirement for disclosing the effects of inflation. By using the assertion classifications contained in SAS No. 31, the study examined the types of evidence available to prove a declaration, which changes a firm’s performance significantly arc those of valuation and allocation. Porwal L.S., and Mishra, N. (1983)investigated into corporate practices in inflation accounting in India. They investigated 235 large private and public sector companies in India through questionnaires. This study reveals that very few companies are approaching for the inflation accounting. All the private sector companies considered inflation only for management accounting purposes, and none showed such information in their impact of inflation of their financial performance in their published annual reports.

Ambrish Gupta (2000), in his thesis “Inflation Accounting: The Indian Context”, this study was a modest effort towards a systematic and comprehensive analysis of various aspects for inflation accounting and looks for offering an acceptable solution to this problem in the Indian context. The study discusses the problem as well as the need for Inflation accounting in India, its origin, subsequent developments the world and the alternative approaches to Inflation Accounting. It also made an assessment of its effect of inflation on the profitability plus financial position, respectively, of the corporate entities. He took into consideration different companies and reflected the effect of inflation on financial performance and position of those firms. Okumus H. Saduman (2002), in his article “The Effect of Inflation on Measures of Profitability in Turkish Banking” aims to demonstrate the disfiguring effects of inflation on the financial statements of Turkish banks, and the corresponding effects on measures of profitability performance. It is observed that after inflation adjustment, the level of profitability in Turkish banking over the period 1989-1995 is lower (overall) with respect to profitability measures calculated using historical cost based on financial statements. In addition to this, a significant change in ranking by bank group, according to profitability performance is noted. This clearly reflects the importance of considering the potential distorting effects of inflation on the financial statements of Turkish banks. Fr. à Paraître (2003), this study is related to most of the countries which have suffered from inflation within recent memory and countries in Latin America and the former Soviet Union have lived with very high rates of inflation for several years. Under inflation, national accounts at current as well as at constant prices will be seriously distorted unless special adjustment techniques are applied. By explaining these in a systematic fashion, the author brings new insights into the definition and measurement of income as well as the calculation and interpretation of price indices. Ross Jennings and Gustavo Maturana (2005), in their study “The Usefulness Of Chilean Inflation Accounting,” examines the usefulness to investors of the “monetary correction” required under Chilean accounting standards. The monetary correction arises when nonmonetary assets, liabilities and owners’ equity are restated for changes in the purchasing power of the Chilean peso, and when assets and liabilities denominated in other currencies are restated for changes in the exchange rate between that currency and the Chilean peso. This paper provided three separate sets of empirical results that examine the relation between the monetary correction and both unexpected returns and security prices, conditional on the remainder of reported earnings. Taken together, the results suggested that the monetary correction provides useful information for investors.

Yaniv Konchitchki, (2011), in his article “Inflation and Nominal Financial Reporting: Implications for Performance and Stock Prices’ studied the Monetary Unit fundamental accounting assumption relies on a stable currency as the unit of record. Even during periods of low inflation, nominal financial statements violate this assumption. Moreover, because inflation affects firms differently depending on the structure of their assets and liabilities, these effects vary across firms and over time. First, it showed that unrecognized economic gains and losses from inflation manifest in future cash flows. Second, it found that investors do not adequately incorporate this information in their pricing decisions. Charles N'cho-Oguee, Daniel L. Blakley, L. William Murray, and Marolee Beaumont Smith (2011), in their article “Econometric Analysis Of Functional Relationship Between Inflation And Growth Of Firms In South Africa : Empirical Research Findings” this research is to investigate the impact inflation and other factors on the growth of business firms operating in South Africa. Data sets of South African firms’ financial statements over the period of 1983-1990 were assembled to permit a detailed examination of the impact of inflation on firm’s financial pertinences. Employing both direct and indirect measures of inflation, it has concluded that inflation affects growth in a negative manner.

3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

The objectives of the proposed study are to measure and record, the effects of price level changes on thefinancial performance under Historical Cost Based Accounting (HCBA) of selected Indian companies.

a) To examine impact of inflation on book profits of firms.

b) To make a comparative analysis of reported and inflated business performance

4. METHODOLOGY AND TESTS USED IN THE STUDY:

The work conducted is a study of 42 undertakings, selected randomly from manufacturing sectors operating in India. The companies so selected are capital intensive, where there is a heavy investment in fixed assets and inventories, profitable and following the same accounting practices throughout the period of study. These sample companies belong to different sectors, viz. Auto, Cement, Chemical, Fertilizer, Food, Petroleum and Steel.

The year-end financial statements of sample companies were used for the comparing the reported and inflated performances. The published annual reports, books, journals, web pages, etc. of the selected companies form the main sources of information. The data so collected are analyzed with the help Current Purchasing Power Method (CPP), Comparative Statement Analysis and Common-size Statement Analysis employed too to draw meaningful conclusion.

Current Purchasing Power Method:

Current Purchasing Power Method of accounting requires the companies to maintain the financial statements on conventional historical cost basis, but it further requires presentation of supplementary statements in items of current purchasing power of currency at the end of the accounting period. In this method the various items of financial statements, i.e. balance sheet and profit and loss account are adjusted with the help of recognized general price index. The consumer price index or the wholesale price index prepared by the Reserve Bank of India can be taken for conversion of historical costs. However, WPI (All Commodities) is being used in this study,

Conversion Process:

For analyzing the impact inflation on financial performance the Historical Cost Based (HCB) accounting, financial statements for all the years from 2004-05 to 2008-09 were converted into Accounting for Current Purchasing Power (CPP) financial statements in terms of the index number prevailing in the month of March 2009. The adjustments for inflation are based on movements in wholesale price index.

The conversion process is explained hereunder

(a) All items of Profit & Loss Account, except Inventory Cost, Depreciation, Taxation, and Equity Dividend have been restated with reference to the "average price index of the year/period" as applicable to the individual year.

(b) Inventory cost has been restated after segregating opening balance of inventories, purchases of raw materials and closing balance of inventories as follows:

· Opening balance of inventories restated in previous year average price index.

· Closing inventories and purchases of raw materials restated in average year price index as applicable to the individual year.

(c) Fixed Assets and Depreciation cost of all the years of study has been adjusted to year base year 2000-01 at year end price index.

(d) Taxation, Dividend on equity shares have been restated with reference to the "end of the year/period index" as applicable to the individual year

(e) The CPP Method divides the Balance Sheet items into two categories: Monetary items and Non-monetary items. Monetary items are those assets and liabilities the amounts of which are fixed by contract or statute in terms of the number of rupees irrespective of the changes in the purchasing power of rupee. Items which comes under monetary in nature are as follows:

· Monetary assets include Investments, which are fixed in rupees, Current Assets other than Inventories.

· Monetary Liabilities include Secured Loans, Unsecured Loans, Current Liabilities and Provisions

Since the value of monetary items is fixed in rupees, they are already expressed in terms of current purchasing power of rupee and, therefore, need no restatement.

For Calculating purchasing power gain/loss, the balance of net monetary liabilities/assets as on the date of the Balance Sheet is bifurcated into opening balance and additions/decrements thereto during the year. The opening balance is restated with reference to the index prevalent on that date. Additions/decrements are restated with reference to the average index of the year. The closing balance is deducted from the total of restated opening balance and additions/decrements. The resultant figure, if positive, is gain otherwise loss in the case of net monetary liabilities and vice versa in the case of net monetary assets.

5. ANALYSIS OF IMPACT OF INFLATION ON FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OFMANICURING COMPANIES IN INDIA:

Financial Statements are said to be store house financial information. If properly analyzed and interpreted, they can provide valuable insights into an organization’s performance and position. Though there are many analytical devices used for analyzing financial statements (viz. financial ratios, common size statements, comparative analysis, and trend analysis). After converting the historical data into current purchasing power, the common-size statement and comparative statement have used to studythe impact of inflation on sample companies for different years of study.

The Tables-2 to 6 shows the Profit and Loss Accounts of Sample companies both under Historical Cost Based (HCB) Method as well as under Current Purchasing Power (CPP) Method for the years 2004-08. These Tables depict different items in their absolute figures as well as relative variation between two accounting methods under discussion. Since direct comparison is impossible between HCB Method and CPP Method, the financial statements have been re-casted to a common basis. The methodology is to equate ‘Total Revenue’ of the relevant year as 100 and recasting all other figures, from raw materials to profit before tax, accordingly as a percentage of total revenue. Again, the profit before tax (PBT) has been equated to 100 and recasting all other items, from tax to retained earnings, as a percentage of PBT. The detailed analysis of different components and their trend is discussed in detail in the following paragraphs.

Analysis of impact of inflation on financial performance for the year 2004-05:

During the year 2004-05, the total revenue of sample companies was Rs.209652.18 crores as per HCB method, whereas under CPP method it was overstated by Rs.49087.16 crores (23.41 percent) due to inflation. The Material Cost was found to be Rs.127841.43 crores and Rs.158880.87 crores as per HCB method and CPP method respectively. The higher figure of material cost under CPP method by Rs.31039.44 crores (24.28 percent) over and above the HCB method is due to the impact of inflation. However, the material cost for the year under consideration was more or less identical as a percentage of total revenue under the both methods, (60.98 percent under HCB method and 61.41 percent under CPP method).

Table No.-2: Impact of inflation on financial performance for the year 2004-05 (Rs. in crores)

Particulars	HCB Method		CPP Method		Change	% of Change
Total Revenue	209652.18	100.00	258739.34	100.00	49087.16	23.41%
Raw Material Cost	127841.43	60.98	158880.87	61.41	31039.44	24.28%
Other cost	39844.86	19.01	49173.98	19.01	9329.12	23.41%
Cost of Goods Sold	167686.29	79.98	208054.85	80.41	40368.56	24.07%
Depreciation	6257.40	2.98	9199.87	3.56	2942.47	47.02%
Purchasing Power Loss	0.00	0.00	5361.21	2.07	5361.21	-
Profit Before Tax	35708.49	17.03	36123.41	13.96	414.92	1.16%
Tax	12146.10	34.01	15000.43	41.53	2854.33	23.50%
Profit After Tax	23562.39	65.99	21122.97	58.47	-2439.42	-10.35%
Equity Dividend	8623.03	24.15	10649.44	29.48	2026.41	23.50%
Retained Earnings	14939.36	41.84	10473.53	28.99	-4465.83	-29.89%

Table No.-3: Impact of inflation on financial performance for the year 2005-06 (Rs. in crores)

Particulars	HCB Method		CPP Method		Change	% of Change
Total Revenue	251492.77	100.00	297218.72	100.00	45725.95	18.18%
Raw Material Cost	163991.38	65.21	194812.43	65.55	30821.05	18.79%
Other cost	42346.83	16.84	50046.25	16.84	7699.42	18.18%
Cost of Goods Sold	206338.21	82.05	244858.69	82.38	38520.48	18.67%
Depreciation	8159.35	3.24	11996.19	4.04	3836.84	47.02%
Purchasing Power Loss	0.00	0.00	3652.31	1.23	3652.31	-
Profit Before Tax	36995.21	14.71	36711.53	12.35	-283.68	-0.77%
Tax	12339.09	33.35	14417.01	39.27	2077.92	16.84%
Profit After Tax	24656.12	66.65	22294.53	60.73	-2361.59	-9.58%
Equity Dividend	9256.95	25.02	10815.83	29.46	1558.88	16.84%
Retained Earnings	15399.17	41.62	11478.70	31.27	-3920.47	-25.46%

Table No.-4: Impact of inflation on financial performance for the year 2006-07 (Rs. in crores)

Particulars	HCB Method		CPP Method		Change	% of Change
Total Revenue	303716.50	100.00	336705.46	100.00	32988.96	10.86%
Raw Material Cost	197634.80	65.07	220866.79	65.60	23231.99	11.76%
Other cost	51372.37	16.91	56952.31	16.91	5579.94	10.86%
Cost of Goods Sold	249007.17	81.99	277819.10	82.51	28811.93	11.57%
Depreciation	8156.90	2.69	11992.59	3.56	3835.69	47.02%
Purchasing Power Loss	0.00	0.00	1719.35	0.51	1719.35	-
Profit Before Tax	46552.43	15.33	45174.42	13.42	-1378.01	-2.96%
Tax	15124.38	32.49	16559.05	36.66	1434.67	9.49%
Profit After Tax	31428.05	67.51	28615.37	63.34	-2812.68	-8.95%
Equity Dividend	10271.06	22.06	11245.35	24.89	974.29	9.49%
Retained Earnings	21156.99	45.45	17370.01	38.45	-3786.98	-17.90%

It is depicted from the Table that the cost of goods sold under CPP method was overstated by Rs.28811.93 crores (11.57 percent) as compared to HCB method. It is found to be at 81.99 percent and 82.51 percent of the total revenue respectively under both the methods. The absolute figure of cost of goods sold was Rs.249007.17 crores only under HCB method but under the CPP method, it was Rs.277819.10 crores. The main factors which attributed to this divergence in cost of goods sold were inflated material cost as well as other costs attached to it. In the same way, depreciation was inflated by Rs.3835.69 crores (47.02 percent) under the CPP method as against the HCB method for the year 2006-07. The figure of depreciation as per HCB method was Rs.8156.90 crores (2.69 percent of the total revenue), which magnified to Rs.11992.59 crores (3.56 percent total revenue) under CPP method due to inflation.

Taking above incidences into consideration, the profit before tax for the year 2006-07 was understated by Rs.1378.01 crores (2.96 percent) under CPP method. The absolute figure of profit before tax was Rs.46552.43 crores under HCB method which decreased to Rs.45174.42 crores under CPP method in 2006-07 due to purchasing power loss. Consequently the sample companies have paid more tax to the extent of 4.17 percent in real terms as revealed by HCB method. Table-4 also reveals that dividend paid was 22.06 percent as per HCB method and 24.89 percent as per CPP method, adversely affecting the retained earnings by Rs.3786.98 crores.

Analysis of impact of inflation on financial performance for the year 2007-08:

As it depicted in Table -5, the total revenue for the year 2007-08 as per HCB method was Rs.339848.84 crores, while as per CPP method it was Rs.359960.06 crores. Thus CPP total revenue was overstated by Rs. 20111.22 crores (5.92 percent) as compared to HCB total revenue due to inflation. On the contrary, the material cost for the year under consideration was more or less same as percentage of total revenue under both the methods of accounting, i.e. 65.10 percent and 65.44 percent. The material cost was Rs.221236.79 crores as per HCB method and Rs.235559.79 crores as per CPP method. The deviation of Rs.14323.00 crores (6.47 percent) between two methods of accounting is attributable to the impact of inflation.

In the year 2007-08, cost of goods sold are found to be Rs.280467.63 crores in case of HCB method and Rs.298295.72 crores in case of CPP method, which is the cause of overstatement of cost of goods sold of sample companies to the extent of Rs.17828.09 crores (6.36 percent of total revenue). On the other hand, the depreciation for the year was found to be 2.78 percent of total revenue as per HCB method and 3.86 percent under the CPP method as a result of which it was reduced by Rs.4441.61 crores (47.02 percent) in HCB method. This is certainly due to change price level or inflation.

Table No.-5 Impact of Inflation on Profit/Loss for the Year 2007-08 (Rs. in crores)

Particulars	HCB Method		CPP Method		Change	% of Change
Total Revenue	339848.84	100.00	359960.06	100.00	20111.22	5.92%
Raw Material Cost	221236.79	65.10	235559.79	65.44	14323.00	6.47%
Other cost	59230.84	17.43	62735.92	17.43	3505.08	5.92%
Cost of Goods Sold	280467.63	82.53	298295.72	82.87	17828.09	6.36%
Depreciation	9445.44	2.78	13887.05	3.86	4441.61	47.02%
Purchasing Power Loss	0.00	0.00	-131.98	-0.04	-131.98	-
Profit Before Tax	49935.77	14.69	47909.28	13.31	-2026.49	-4.06%
Tax	17278.93	34.60	17563.36	36.66	284.43	1.65%
Profit After Tax	32656.84	65.40	30345.92	63.34	-2310.92	-7.08%
Equity Dividend	10527.49	21.08	10700.78	22.34	173.29	1.65%
Retained Earnings	22129.35	44.32	19645.14	41.00	-2484.21	-11.23%

Table No.-6 Impact of Inflation on Profit/Loss for the Year 2008-09 Rs in crores

Particulars	HCB Method		CPP Method		Change	% of Change
Total Revenue	401655.13	100.00	393685.81	100.00	-7969.32	-1.98%
Raw Material Cost	272756.67	67.91	269792.75	68.53	-2963.92	-1.09%
Other cost	70408.42	17.53	69011.43	17.53	-1396.99	-1.98%
Cost of Goods Sold	343165.09	85.44	338804.18	86.06	-4360.91	-1.27%
Depreciation	10419.58	2.59	15319.26	3.89	4899.68	47.02%
Purchasing Power Loss	0.00	0.00	-54.18	-0.01	-54.18	-
Profit Before Tax	48070.46	11.97	39616.55	10.06	-8453.91	-17.59%
Tax	14778.17	30.74	14778.17	37.30	0.00	0.00%
Profit After Tax	33292.29	69.26	24838.38	62.70	-8453.91	-25.39%
Equity Dividend	10371.96	21.58	10371.96	26.18	0.00	0.00%
Retained Earnings	22920.33	47.68	14466.42	36.52	-8453.91	-36.88%

The reduction of material and other costs was responsible understatement of cost of goods sold in the year 2008-09 under CPP method. The cost of goods sold as a percentage of total revenue was found to be 85.44 percent as per HCB method and 86.06 percent under CPP method as result of change in the level of prices. On the other hand, the depreciation has been overstated by Rs.4899.68 crores (47.02 percent) under CPP method as contrast to HCB method for the year 2008-09. It was recorded at 2.59 percent of the total revenue as per HCB method and 3.89 percent of total revenue under CPP method. The absolute figure of depreciation was Rs.10419.58 crores as per HCB method, which has inflated to Rs.15319.26 crores in the case of CPP method.

Owing to the above incidence, the profit before tax and profit after tax in the last year of study i.e. 2008-09 has been understated by Rs.8453.91 crores in CPP method as compared to HCB method. In the same year, it was manifested that under CPP method, the profit before tax came down from Rs.48070.46 crores to Rs.39616.55 crores and profit after tax from Rs.33292.29 crores to Rs.24838.38 crores even though the sample companies had recorded purchasing power gains of Rs.54.18 crores under CPP method. The CPP method adjustments have thus proved that historical profit is a myth. On the other hand, it is obvious from HCB profit and loss account that the sample companies had paid tax @30.74 percent of profit before tax in the year 2008-09 and 37.30 percent as per CPP profit and loss account. This indicates that sample companies have paid extra tax in real terms than exposed by HCB method to the extent of 6.56 percent. Moreover, the sample companies have also paid more dividends due to overstatement of profits leaving a smaller amount for Retained Earnings in 2008-09.

6. CONCLUSION:

From the above discussion, it is clear that due to inflation the financial performance of sample companies has been understated, resulting additional payment of tax and dividend, but reduction in shareholders’ funds by dropping retained earnings. Moreover, the dismal performance revealed under the CPP method points towards the efficiency of the management in fighting against inflation. Whatever view one takes, no one can deny that, but inflation has taken its toll. The reason for overstatement of corporate profitability under HCB method may be attributed to undervaluation of material cost and depreciation. The performance which otherwise appears to be quite good, turned out to be very dismal, when adjustments for current purchasing power of rupee are made. The CPP method adjustments have thus proved that historical profitability is a fairy story.

7. REFERENCES:

1. Antonios A. P., (1986) in their article “Assessing the impact of inflation on business Performance under conditions of limited Financial disclosure: the case of firms Operating in Greece”, University of Piraeus, p 25-42.

2. Baran A., Lakonishok J. and Ofer A. B., (1980) in their article entitled “The Information Content of General Price Level Adjustment Earnings: Some Empirical Evidence”.

3. Daly D. J. (1982), Inflation, Inflation Accounting and its Effect, Canadian Manufacturing 1966-82”, York University, Downs view, Ontario pp. 355-374.

4. Gupta A., (2000) The Book “Inflation Accounting The Indian Context” Kanishka Publishers and Distributors.

5. Gupta R. and Bhandari L. C., (1978) in Impact of Inflation Accounting on Corporate Profits - A Study of 57 Indian Companies, Institute of Management Ahmadabad, Research and Publication Department , working Paper Series

6. Gupta R., (1978) Inflation Accounting in India - A Case Study of the Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Institute of Management Ahmadabad, Research and Publication Department, working Paper Series.

7. Hand Book on Statistics of the Indian Economy, Reverse Bank of India 2008-09

8. Hand Book on Statistics of the Indian Economy, Reverse Bank of India September 15 2011.

9. http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Inflation+Accounting (2012)

10. http://hindi.economictimes.indiatimes.com/currentquote.cms?ticker=a&matchcompanyname=true&pagesize=30&pagenumber=1

11. http://www.moneycontrol.com/stocksmarketsindia/

12. Jennings R. &Maturana G. (2005) in their article The Usefulness Of Chilean Inflation Accounting, in the journal ABANTE, p 85-118

13. Kohler, E.L., A Dictionary of Accountants, 6th edition, Prentice Flail of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 1983, p.111.

14. Konchitchki Y., (2011), Inflation and Nominal Financial Reporting: Implications for Performance and Stock Prices, The Accounting Review, Volume 86 (3): 1045–1085.

15. Lacey, K.C., Some implications of the first-in-first-out method of stock valuation, Economics, Feb., 1945, PP. 26-30.

16. N'cho-Oguee C., Blakley D. L., Murray L. W. & Smith M. B., (2 011), Econometric Analysis Of Functional Relationship Between Inflation And Growth Of Firms In South Africa : Empirical Research Findings Journal of Financial Management and Analysis, Om Sai Ram Centre for Financial Management Research p1-19

17. Norby W. C., (1981) The Interpretation of Inflation Accounting Information, The SAXE Lecture in Accounting. P48-55

18. Nunley, Terry James, 1983 ‘Can Disclosures of the Effects of Changing Pieces be audited? A Case Study’ Dissertation Abstracts International Vol. 44 No. 8 February, 1984, p. 2504-A,

19. Okumus, H. S., (2002) “ The effect of inflation on measures of profitability in Turkish banking”, YapıKredi Economic Review, 2002, vol.13, no. 2, pp. 3-18.

20. Paraître Fr. (2003) in the article Inflation Accounting A Manual on National Accounting Under Conditions of High Inflation. OCDE Comptesnationaux et Statistiquesrétrospectives, pp. I-100 (101)

21. Porwal, L.S. and Mishra, N., 1983 Corporate Practices in Inflation Accounting in India; Indian Journal of Accounting (Journal of the Indian Accounting Association) Vol. XIII, June & December, 1983, Part II.

22. Sharma R. K And Gupta S. K.,(2003) A book on Management Accounting pp31.1-31.21

23. Sinha S.L.N., 1974 “Inflation and Company Finance”, in Sinha (Ed.), Inflation in India, pp. 276-280.

24. Table of Wholesale Price Index -All India, Economic Survey of Delhi, 2007-08 Month And Year Wise Wholesale Price Index Numbers of All India P272-278

Received on 11.01.2013 Modified on 15.01.2013

Asian J. Management 4(1): Jan.-Mar. 2013 page 28-35

Year	Average	Average as per 2004-05	Year End	Year End as per2004-05
2000-01	83.19	100.00	84.00	100.00
2001-02	86.18	103.59	85.48	101.76
2002-03	89.12	107.13	90.60	107.86
2003-04	93.98	112.97	94.93	113.01
2004-05	100.07	120.29	100.00	119.05
2005-06	104.50	125.62	105.70	125.83
2006-07	111.40	133.91	112.80	134.29
2007-08	116.60	140.16	121.50	144.64
2008-09	126.00	151.46	123.50	147.02