Gillette_India_Limited_AR_20

Annual Report 2019-20 116 Notes to Financial Statements for the year ended June 30, 2020 Gillette India Limited Maturity profile of defined benefit obligation: Gratuity Plan ` in lakhs Within 1 year 222 1 - 2 year 249 2 - 3 year 335 3 - 4 year 382 4 - 5 year 602 5 - 10 years 2956 Significant actuarial assumptions of the determination of the defined obligation are discount rate, expected salary increase and mortality. The sensitivity analyses below have been determined based on reasonable possible changes of the respective assumptions occurring at the end of the reporting period, while holding all other assumptions constant. Gratuity Plan (Funded) If the discount rate is 50 basis points higher (lower), the defined benefit obligation would decrease by ` 367 lakhs (increase by ` 400 lakhs) (as at June 30, 2019: decrease by ` 319 lakhs (increase by ` 348 lakhs)). If the expected salary growth increases (decreases) by 0.5%, the defined benefit obligation would increase by ` 384 lakhs (decrease by ` 357 lakhs) (as at June 30, 2019: increase by ` 339 lakhs (decrease by ` 314 lakhs)). Compensated absence plan (Unfunded) If the discount rate is 50 basis points higher (lower), the defined benefit obligation would decrease by ` 34 lakhs (increase by ` 37 lakhs) (as at June 30, 2019: decrease by ` 27 lakhs (increase by ` 30 lakhs)). If the expected salary growth increases (decreases) by 0.5%, the defined benefit obligation would increase by ` 36 lakhs (decrease by ` 33 lakhs) (as at June 30, 2019: increase by ` 29 lakhs (decrease by ` 27 lakhs)). Post retirement medical benefit (PRMB) (Unfunded) If the discount rate is 50 basis points higher (lower), the defined benefit obligation would decrease by ` 6 lakhs (increase by ` 7 lakhs) (as at June 30, 2019: decrease by ` 6 lakhs (increase by ` 7 lakhs)). If the expected medical inflation rate increases (decreases) by 0.5%, the defined benefit obligation would increase by ` 6 lakhs (decrease by ` 6 lakhs) (as at June 30, 2019: increase by ` 6 lakhs (decrease by ` 6 lakhs)). The sensitivity analysis presented above may not be representative of the actual change of the defined benefit obligation as it is unlikely that the change in assumptions would occur in isolation of one another as some of the assumptions may be correlated. Furthermore, in presenting the above sensitivity analysis, the present value of the defined benefit obligation has been calculated using the projected unit credit method as the end of the reporting period, which is the same as that applied in calculating the defined benefit obligation liability recognised in the balance sheet. There was no change in the methods and assumptions used in preparing the sensitivity analysis from prior years.