ICAI examiner comments CA Inter May 2026, paper by paper
ICAI's examiner comments for CA Inter May 2026 are printed at the end of the Group I and Group II suggested answers volumes, question by question. Across all six papers the examiners say the same thing: candidates often knew the topic, but wrote general answers instead of applying it to the facts, missed a figure or instruction printed in the question, or gave a correct conclusion without the provision behind it.
ICAI's Intermediate suggested answers page (opens in a new tab) on icai.org now has September 2026 answers paper by paper, but those six PDFs carry no examiner comments. May 2026 is the latest attempt with them, so these are the comments to use for January 2027. The "write instead" lines are our suggestions; every quote links to ICAI.
ICAI examiner comments CA Inter May 2026: the summary
| Paper | What the examiners flagged (May 2026) |
|---|---|
| 1. Advanced Accounting | Q2: "presentation and disclosure errors resulted in loss of marks"; Q3(b): share denominations left out |
| 2. Corporate and Other Laws | Q3(c): "although it was a direct question, many examinees gave generalized answers"; Q2(b): "brief conclusions without discussing the complete statutory provisions" |
| 3. Taxation | Q1: wrong depreciation rate "even though the same is stated in the question itself"; GST Q5(a): conclusions without "appropriate legal reasoning" |
| 4. Cost and Management Accounting | Q2(b), Q3(a), Q3(b): "Below Average"; Q6(a), JIT: "Poor" |
| 5. Auditing and Ethics | Q1(c): "general points" instead of "applying them to the given scenario"; Q6(b): Other Matter confused with Emphasis of Matter or KAM |
| 6. FM and SM | FM Q4(a) and Q4(b): "Poor"; SM Q8(a): "Most responses were generic" |
Sources: Intermediate Group I, May 2026, PDF (opens in a new tab) (Papers 1–3) and Intermediate Group II, May 2026, PDF (opens in a new tab) (Papers 4–6), section "Examiners' comments on the performance of the examinees".
Paper 1: Advanced Accounting
The examiners' main point: the accounting was often right, but the presentation and particulars were not.
- Q2 (Schedule III): "a few examinees committed errors in the presentation and classification of Trade Receivables. Some examinees also failed to correctly disclose bank balances between Scheduled and Non-Scheduled Banks". ICAI: "These presentation and disclosure errors resulted in loss of marks."
- Q3(b) (internal reconstruction): candidates "failed to mention the denomination of equity shares and preference shares in the respective ledger account heads". "Although the accounting treatment was generally correct, omission of these important particulars made the journal entries incomplete."
- Q5(b): the majority "failed to apply the requirements of AS 24 'Discontinuing Operations' to the given case."
- Q6(a): "Many examinees wrote general answers relating to accounting standards without specifically addressing the factors asked in the question."
Write instead: write the full journal entry heading ("Equity Share Capital A/c (₹10 each) Dr."), classify every Schedule III line, and for a standard-based question state the AS rule, apply it to the figures, then conclude.
Paper 2: Corporate and Other Laws
The examiners' main point: correct conclusions with incomplete provisions.
- Q3(c), Rule of Harmonious Construction: "although it was a direct question, many examinees gave generalized answers and did not explain the rule with reference to its application in the interpretation of statutes." Q4(c), ejusdem generis: many "could not define the term correctly and did not state all the exceptions to the Rule."
- Q2(b), satisfaction of charge: "a large number of examinees gave brief conclusions without discussing the complete statutory provisions."
Write instead: for every case question, three steps: the section or rule with its time limits and numbers, its application to the names and facts given, and a one-line conclusion. For interpretation rules, learn the definition, the exceptions and one example of how a court applies it.
Paper 3: Taxation
The examiners' main point: facts in the question ignored, and amendments missed.
- Q1, income tax computation: "Majority of the examinees failed to apply the correct depreciation rate on the Pollution control equipment even though the same is stated in the question itself." Some also "wrongly provided for additional depreciation on pollution control equipment" under the default regime.
- Q2(b), TCS under section 206C(1F): many applied the ₹10 lakh threshold "on the aggregate value of the handbag and wristwatch, whereas this threshold is required to be examined separately for each such notified good."
- Q4(a): many were "not aware that, under the default tax regime, loss from a self-occupied house property cannot arise".
- Q4(b): many failed to note "that the time limit for filing an updated return is 48 months from the end of the assessment year and not the previous year."
- GST Q5(a): "Many examinees also failed to support their conclusions with appropriate legal reasoning." Q5(b), rule 86B: the ₹50 lakh threshold "must be examined separately for each month."
Write instead: before you compute, tick every figure and rate the question gives you. Write "assessment year" or "previous year" deliberately. In GST, give the section or rule and the reason with each conclusion. Check what law applies to your attempt in what's applicable for your CA attempt.
Paper 4: Cost and Management Accounting
ICAI rates each question in this paper. In May 2026 the weak spots were marginal costing figures, joint costs, fixed overhead variances and JIT theory.
| Question | Topic | ICAI's rating |
|---|---|---|
| Q2(b) | Break-even and margin of safety: failed "to compute the correct total fixed cost and cash fixed cost" | Below Average |
| Q3(a) | Joint costs at split-off and further processing: "inadequate understanding of the application of the incremental approach" | Below Average |
| Q3(b) | Fixed overhead variances: "Although the question was adapted from the study material", most computed only the expenditure variance | Below Average |
| Q6(a) | JIT (demand-pull system): "Most examinees failed to identify the correct inventory management system" | Poor |
Write instead: show the fixed cost and cash fixed cost as a separate working before any break-even figure. Practise the study material's own questions (CA Inter study material, paper by paper); ICAI says several were adapted from it. A worked fixed overhead variance check and the five costing traps from this list are in CA Inter costing mock test papers Jan 2027.
Paper 5: Auditing and Ethics
The examiners' main point: general audit points instead of the specific requirement.
- Q1(c), SA 580: "Several examinees merely reproduced general points instead of applying them to the given scenario." Many missed that written representations must not be dated after the auditor's report.
- Q2(c), CARO: instead of Clause (xv) (non-cash transactions with directors), many "explained the reporting requirements relating to immovable properties under Clause (i)."
- Q3(a), sample size: "while the conclusion was often correct, the reasoning supporting it was incomplete or technically inadequate."
- Q6(b): "Some examinees incorrectly referred to an Emphasis of Matter Paragraph or a Key Audit Matter Paragraph" instead of the Other Matter Paragraph.
Write instead: underline whose view the question asks for (auditor, lessee, management), name the right SA or clause first, and write points about the entity in the case, not a list from memory.
Paper 6: FM and SM
FM: the first figure went wrong and the rest followed. SM: answers were generic.
- FM Q1(a), leverages: "Most examinees were unable to calculate the current level of sales correctly" (Below Average).
- FM Q2(b) and Q3(b), working capital: financing cost of the cash discount and minimum cash requirement wrong (both Below Average).
- FM Q4(a), MM dividend irrelevance assumptions, and Q4(b), types of financing: both "Poor".
- SM Q5(a): students could not "explicitly relate the phases of Kurt Lewin's Change Management Model to the given case study." Q8(a), strategic uncertainty: "The overall performance was poor... Most responses were generic and lacked analytical depth."
Write instead: in FM, show the first derived figure (sales, dividend rate) as a numbered working note, so every later step is visible and can be marked; see step marking in CA exams. In SM, name the model or strategy, then give each point with a line from the case. A worked leverage check from FM Q1(a), six FM formula traps and how ICAI's SM answers follow the marks bracket are in CA Inter FM SM mock test paper Jan 2027.
Examiner comments ICAI CA Inter Jan 26: what repeated in May 2026
The same topics went wrong in both attempts. These are the ones to fix first for January 2027.
| Paper | January 2026 | May 2026 again |
|---|---|---|
| Advanced Accounting | Q6(a): AS 24 disclosures; Q4: AS 14 purchase consideration; Q6(c): branch accounts | Q5(b): AS 24; Q4: AS 14; Q6(c): branch accounts |
| Corporate and Other Laws | Q3(c): "general and vague answer" on rules of construction; Q5(a): foreign company filing (Registrar's power to extend time) | Q3(c) and Q4(c): interpretation rules; Q6(b): foreign company filing |
| Taxation | Q1: wrong depreciation rate on the solar lighting system; Q4(a): house property under the default regime | Q1: wrong depreciation rate; Q4(a): house property under the default regime |
| Cost | Q1(b): joint products, Below Average | Q3(a): joint costs, Below Average |
| Auditing and Ethics | Q3(a): EOM confused with Other Matter or KAM | Q6(b): Other Matter confused with EOM or KAM |
| FM and SM | Q1(b): factoring (working capital), Below Average; Q4(a): seed capital (types of financing), Poor | Q2(b), Q3(b): working capital, Below Average; Q4(b): types of financing, Poor |
Sources: Intermediate Group I, January 2026, PDF (opens in a new tab) and Intermediate Group II, January 2026, PDF (opens in a new tab), ICAI's "Summary of Examiner's Comment".
How to use the examiner comments for CA Inter Jan 2027
Group I is on 2, 4 and 6 January 2027 and Group II on 8, 10 and 12 January (ICAI, PDF (opens in a new tab)). Use the comments in three passes:
- Now: read each paper's comments next to its question paper and mark the repeat topics above in your notes. How many marks each of those chapters carried is in CA Inter chapter wise weightage Jan 2027.
- In every mock: check your copy against this list, the way how to check your answers with ICAI suggested answers explains. Our CA Inter Jan 2027 mock test plan gives the dates for each mock.
- In the last week: rewrite one answer per repeat topic, timed, from memory.
| Mistake ICAI reported | Check before you hand in |
|---|---|
| General answer | Provision, application to these facts, conclusion |
| Fact in the question missed | Every figure, rate and instruction used |
| Presentation and particulars | Schedule III format, denominations, numbered working notes |
| Bare conclusion | Reason before every conclusion |
| Wrong standard or paragraph | SA, AS or section named and checked first |
| Part of the question missed | Every sub-part answered, and the number of points asked (e.g. "three") given |
The same pattern shows up at CA Final; see ICAI examiner comments for CA Final May 2026.
Frequently asked questions
Where can I find ICAI examiner comments for CA Inter May 2026?
At the end of the Group I (opens in a new tab) and Group II (opens in a new tab) suggested answers volumes (PDF), in the section "Examiners' comments on the performance of the examinees". Both are on ICAI's May 2026 Intermediate page (opens in a new tab). Each paper's own PDF, with the January 2026, September 2025 and May 2025 answers, is linked paper by paper in CA Inter suggested answers May 2026 PDF.
Where are the CA Inter examiner comments for Jan 2026?
As separate "Summary of Examiner's Comment" PDFs for Group I (opens in a new tab) and Group II (opens in a new tab), on ICAI's January 2026 Intermediate page (opens in a new tab).
Where are the examiner comments for CA Inter May 2025?
On ICAI's May 2025 Intermediate page (opens in a new tab), under "Examiner's Comment on the Performance of the Examinees" for Group I and Group II.
Are the September 2026 CA Inter examiner comments out?
ICAI's Intermediate suggested answers page (opens in a new tab) has the September 2026 suggested answers (opens in a new tab) paper by paper, and those six PDFs carry no examiner comments. May 2026 is the latest Intermediate attempt whose comments ICAI has published.
Which CA Inter topics did ICAI rate "Poor" in May 2026?
Cost Q6(a) (JIT), FM Q4(a) (MM dividend irrelevance assumptions) and Q4(b) (types of financing), SM Q8(a) (strategic uncertainty) and the second option of SM Q8(b) (proactive and reactive strategies).
Practise against the examiners' list
Our CA mock tests for Inter are full-syllabus papers on the latest ICAI pattern, with every amendment applicable for January 2027 tested. You write by hand, upload one PDF, and within 24 hours get ICAI-style step-wise marks with the reason for every mark cut and the correct line to write.
- CA Inter Group I mock tests: Advanced Accounting, Law, Taxation
- CA Inter Group II mock tests: Cost, Audit, FM and SM
Pick your group on the CA Inter test series page, or see every level of our CA test series. ICAI's own MTPs, RTPs and past papers are on our CA Intermediate free resources page.