Rates of Depreciation as per Companies Act, 2013 — A Comprehensive Thesis

Depreciation represents the systematic allocation of the depreciable amount of an asset over its useful life. Under the Companies Act, 2013, the focus shifted from predefined depreciation rates to a more principles-based approach based on “useful life” and “residual value.” This marked a significant departure from the earlier Companies Act, 1956 framework, which specified fixed depreciation percentages for different asset classes. The new regime places responsibility on management to estimate the life of each asset more realistically, ensuring more accurate financial reporting that reflects the actual economic usage of assets.
            

The Companies Act, 2013 introduced Schedule II, which prescribes the useful lives of various tangible assets instead of specifying straight depreciation rates. This change encourages companies to assess how long an asset will actually generate economic benefits and depreciate it accordingly. While indicative useful lives are provided, companies are free to adopt different useful lives based on technical assessments. This flexibility ensures that the asset valuation aligns more closely with business realities and technological advancements.
            

Under Schedule II, companies are required to estimate both the useful life and residual value of assets. The residual value is normally restricted to five percent of the original cost of the asset unless supported by technical justification. These principles ensure consistency and discipline in financial reporting, preventing arbitrary depreciation and manipulation of profits. The estimation of useful life involves considering physical wear and tear, technical obsolescence, maintenance policies, expected usage, and industry standards. This professional judgment-based approach enhances the transparency of financial statements.
            

Schedule II classifies assets into three broad categories—buildings, plant and machinery, and furniture and equipment. Each class contains specific sub-categories with suggested useful lives. For example, factory buildings have a useful life of thirty years, office equipment typically has a life of five years, and computers have a life of three years. This structured categorization ensures uniformity for major asset classes while allowing flexibility for specialized industries. The classification also supports companies in achieving more streamlined fixed asset record-keeping.
            

Buildings are categorized into several types, such as factory buildings, office buildings, godowns, and temporary structures. Factory buildings generally carry a useful life of thirty years, whereas general-purpose buildings also have a similar lifespan. Temporary structures, however, have a significantly shorter useful life of three years due to their limited durability. This classification acknowledges both the long-term nature of durable building constructions and the transient nature of structures built for short-term operational requirements.
            

Plant and machinery form the largest component of depreciable assets for most industrial and manufacturing companies. Schedule II prescribes useful lives ranging from five years for assets like computers and information technology equipment to fifteen years for general-purpose machinery. Special-purpose machines may have useful lives of up to twenty years. The variation reflects usage patterns, technological advancement rates, and the physical intensity of operations. Companies in sectors such as power, telecom, infrastructure, and engineering often rely on technical evaluations to justify different useful lives based on industry-specific usage.
            

Furniture and fittings typically have a useful life of ten years, acknowledging their long-term but gradual deterioration. Office equipment such as printers, scanners, and other devices usually have useful lives of five years. Motor vehicles used for commercial purposes generally carry a life of eight years, while motor cars for non-commercial use are often depreciated over six years. Buses, lorries, and other heavy vehicles also have specified useful lives that match their expected operational endurance. These useful lives ensure that companies recognize depreciation expenses in line with how quickly these assets wear out.
            

The Companies Act, 2013 permits companies to use either the Straight Line Method (SLM) or the Written Down Value (WDV) method for calculating depreciation. The chosen method must reflect the pattern in which the asset’s economic benefits are consumed. While Schedule II provides the useful life, companies can compute depreciation expenses based on either method. Once chosen, the method must be applied consistently unless a change is justified as improving financial reporting. The flexibility between SLM and WDV helps organizations align their depreciation policies with industry norms and internal financial strategies.
            

One of the key introductions in the Companies Act, 2013 is the concept of component accounting. If an asset consists of significant parts with distinct useful lives, each component must be depreciated separately. This requirement improves accuracy in asset valuation, particularly for complex assets such as aircraft, plants, and power generation equipment. Component accounting ensures that assets are not over- or under-depreciated by applying uniform depreciation to parts that age differently. It also encourages companies to maintain detailed asset registers and recognize replacements more accurately.
            

Although Schedule II primarily deals with tangible assets, it also covers certain intangible assets. In cases where the useful life of an intangible asset cannot be determined, such assets are amortized over a period of ten years. Patents, trademarks, licenses, and similar rights are amortized based on their actual useful life, which depends on legal rights, technological factors, and usage patterns. Companies must ensure consistent amortization policies backed by sound reasoning to prevent misstatement of financial results.
            

When the Companies Act, 2013 came into force, companies had to evaluate the remaining useful life of existing assets based on the new Schedule II. If the remaining useful life was already exhausted, the carrying value after subtracting residual value was adjusted against retained earnings. This transition created significant one-time impacts for many organizations, especially those using older assets or those whose depreciation policies under the previous regime differed materially from the new schedule. While transitional adjustments were complex, they brought a higher degree of accuracy to asset valuation.
            

While Schedule II provides standard useful lives, certain industries—such as power generation, mining, infrastructure, telecom, and aviation—often adopt different useful lives based on regulatory guidelines or technical assessments. These deviations must be disclosed in the financial statements along with justification. This flexibility allows companies to adapt depreciation to their operational realities without compromising transparency. In many cases, independent engineers or technical experts certify the useful life based on performance, safety norms, and industry benchmarks.
            

Depreciation directly influences profitability, taxation, and distributable profits. A lower useful life results in higher depreciation expenses and reduced profits in the initial years, while a longer useful life spreads the expense over a longer period. Companies may choose useful lives aligned with asset usage patterns to ensure that profit reporting is realistic. Transparent and accurate depreciation practices help stakeholders evaluate the true financial health and operational efficiency of the business.
            

Companies must disclose the depreciation method, useful lives adopted, and any deviation from the useful lives specified in Schedule II. Additionally, changes in depreciation methods or useful lives must be reported as changes in accounting estimates. Such disclosures enhance comparability among companies and ensure that financial statements reflect informed management judgments. Proper disclosure also builds investor confidence and supports regulatory compliance.
            

The depreciation framework under the Companies Act, 2013 represents a modern, flexible, and principles-based approach to asset valuation. By shifting the focus from predefined rates to useful lives, the Act encourages companies to adopt realistic depreciation practices backed by technical assessment. This enhances the reliability of financial statements, aligns accounting practices with global standards, and ensures transparency for stakeholders. Effective implementation of Schedule II helps companies better reflect asset consumption patterns, manage profitability, and maintain regulatory compliance in a dynamic business environment.
            

Source document (verbatim): :contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}