Qualification > Commerce

accounts doubt~~AS level!!

<< < (4/4)

aparna.agrawal1995:
Hey dasith I have a doubt with your calculation. The question says that the bad debt of 650 is included in the debtors calculation given in the trial balance so why do we subtract it again from the debtors figure to get the figure of 12750?  ???

Dasith:

--- Quote from: aparna.agrawal1995 on October 29, 2011, 09:56:49 am ---Hey dasith I have a doubt with your calculation. The question says that the bad debt of 650 is included in the debtors calculation given in the trial balance so why do we subtract it again from the debtors figure to get the figure of 12750?  ???

--- End quote ---

Yea exactly thats the whole idea of deducting it!, IF the trail balance figure includes bad debts (not adjested for) then we deduct the unadjested bad debts to get the correct figure, for debtors.If the question dosent say anything about bad debts being inluded, then we dont deduct from debtors...

aparna.agrawal1995:
Yeah exactly my point. The question says - at 31 may 2004 it was found that the debtors included a bad debt of-$650. Now if the debtors figure in the trial balance adjusts for the bad debts then again subtracting it would be wrong. :/
The word "includes" in this context means "debtors adjusted for bad debts", or "debtors not adjusted for bad debts"?

Dasith:

--- Quote from: aparna.agrawal1995 on October 29, 2011, 08:37:19 pm ---Yeah exactly my point. The question says - at 31 may 2004 it was found that the debtors included a bad debt of-$650. Now if the debtors figure in the trial balance adjusts for the bad debts then again subtracting it would be wrong. :/
The word "includes" in this context means "debtors adjusted for bad debts", or "debtors not adjusted for bad debts"?

--- End quote ---

ohh so its a problem of understanding the question , Word included means the bad debts are in the figure for debtors ( in other words not adjested for) in order to correct that we deduct the bad debts from debtors.
IF the word exclude was there then wat u said is correct ..

aparna.agrawal1995:
Ohhh now I've understood what you said. Thank you so much for your help. :) +Rep

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page