Register now or log in to join your professional community.
Both are quite distinctive, there can't be comparison on the both. At same time, both are relevant to each other.
Going concern concept is all about obtaining the financial position of the company based on its current operating activities, either company gonna survive in upcoming year/years or not.
And,
Historical Cost Principal is only about to provide assumption for some specific costs of relevant assets, that are being used since a number of years.
Going concern checks if the company can run in the next 12 months or is it going to liquidate.
We were thought to understand that if the balance sheet values are based on historical cost then business assumes going concern and it is very true.
However, IFRS allows -
Valuation of fixed assets based on revaluation model which is primarily based on fair values
Separate classification of assets held for sale valued at net realisable values (again at fair values less cost to realise proceeds)
Valuation of Financial instruments through Profit or loss.
Almost of the Assets side is based on fair values and this is required to state the true position of business
And you can't say that business is not going to be a going concern just because the Fixed assets are valued as per revaluation method and assets held for sale are valued to their net realisable values & etc...,
The fact you have to consider is how much portion of your fixed assets are classified as "Held for sale" and how it effects the entity's going concern.
Finally, if the Balance sheet is prepared based on Historical cost then the business assumes going concern. However, you can't assume businees to loose going concern just because that some items are valued at their fair values
