Q.A, B and C are partners in a firm sharing profit in the ratio of 3 : 2 :1. Now they decide to change in profit sharing ratio to 1 : 1 :1. They wish that the change in profit sharing ratio should come into effect retrospectively, for the last two year.
The profit for the last two years were :
First year's profit ₹ 40,000
Second year's profit ₹ 20,000
Show the adjustment of profit by a single adjustment journal entry.

Past Adjustments — Why They're Needed

A partnership firm prepares its final accounts, distributes the year's profit among the

partners, and closes its books. Then, sometimes weeks or months later, someone notices a

mistake: interest on capital that the deed promised was never credited, or a partner's

salary was left out, or interest on drawings was never charged. The books are already

closed and the profit is already split — what now?

The Firm Never Reopens the Old Accounts

Going back and rewriting last year's Profit and Loss Account, or redoing the Profit and

Loss Appropriation Account from scratch, is never the answer. Instead, the correction is

made through a single adjusting entry that fixes only the net effect of the mistake

on each partner's capital account — nothing else about the old accounts is touched.

Two Ways to Make the Same Correction

1. Through a Profit and Loss Adjustment Account. This method explicitly shows the

omitted item as if it were being recorded for the first time (e.g. crediting the missed

interest on capital to each partner), and then reverses the wrong distribution that

already happened (the amount that was wrongly folded into ordinary profit and split in

the profit-sharing ratio). Two clean journal entries, routed through one temporary

account, make the reasoning easy to follow — useful when there's more than one omitted

item, or when the workings need to be shown in full.

2. Directly in the partners' capital accounts. This is a shortcut: instead of two

journal entries through a temporary account, prepare one statement of net effect —

what each partner should have received for the omitted item, versus what they

actually received (since that amount was folded into the ordinary profit split) — and

pass a single entry moving the difference from whoever was over-credited to whoever was

under-credited.

Both methods always land on the identical final correction. Method 1 shows more

working; Method 2 is faster once the net-effect statement is second nature.

The Recurring Pattern

Every past-adjustment problem follows the same shape, regardless of which item was

missed (interest on capital, interest on drawings, salary, or a wrong rate):

1. Work out what should have happened — the correct amount for the omitted or wrongly-recorded item, for each partner.
2. Work out what actually happened — since the mistake meant this amount stayed in …