NOTE 1  ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Organization and Business

Scio Diamond Technology Corporation (the Company) was incorporated under the laws of the State of Nevada as Krossbow Holding Corp. on September 17, 2009.  The original business plan of the Company was focused on offsetting C02 emissions through the creation and protection of forest-based carbon sinks. The Company has since abandoned its original business plan and restructured its business to focus on man-made diamond technology development and commercialization.

On July 13, 2011 the Board of Directors of the Company resolved to authorize a 2-for-1 forward split of its issued and outstanding common shares, whereby every one (1) old share of common stock was to be exchanged for two (2) new shares of the Companys common stock, effective on August 5, 2011. As a result, once the forward split was declared effective by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the issued and outstanding shares of common stock increased from 3,200,000 prior to the forward split to 6,400,000 following the forward split.  The forward split shares are payable upon surrender of certificates to the Companys transfer agent.  The accompanying financial statements and notes give retroactive effect to the forward split for all periods presented.

Going Concern

The Company has not generated any revenue to date and consequently its operations are subject to all risks inherent in the establishment of a new business enterprise.  For the period from inception, September 17, 2009, through March 31, 2012, the Company has accumulated losses of ($2,103,957).

These factors raise substantial doubt about the Company?s ability to continue as a going concern. Management has responded to these circumstances by taking the following actions:

In the opinion of management, these actions will be sufficient to provide the Company with the liquidity it needs to meet its obligations and continue as a going concern.  There can be no assurance, however, that the Company will successfully implement these plans.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if the Company is unable to continue as a going concern.

Accounting Basis

The Company?s financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (?GAAP?).

Estimates and Assumptions

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.  Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The carrying value of cash, accounts payable and notes payable approximate their fair value due to the short period of these instruments.

Development Stage Company

The financial statements have been prepared following the requirements of GAAP for development-stage companies.  A development-stage company is one in which planned principal operations have not commenced or if its operations have commenced, there have been no significant revenues therefrom.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

For purposes of the statement of cash flows, the Company considers highly liquid financial instruments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents.  At March 31, 2012, the Company held no cash equivalents.

Revenue Recognition

The Company will recognize revenue when products are fully delivered or services have been provided and collection is reasonably assured.

Income Taxes

The Company utilizes the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes.  Under the asset and liability method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the differences between financial reporting basis and the tax basis of the assets and liabilities and are measured using enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse.  An allowance against deferred tax assets is recognized when it is more likely than not that such tax benefits will not be realized.

Management has evaluated the potential impact in accounting for uncertainties in income taxes and has determined that it has no significant uncertain income tax positions as of March 31, 2012.  Income tax returns subject to review by taxing authorities include March 31, 2010, 2011, and 2012.

Basic and Diluted Net Loss per Share

Net loss per share is presented under two formats: basic net loss per common share, which is computed using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period, and diluted net loss per common share, which is computed using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding, and the weighted average dilutive potential common shares outstanding, computed using the treasury stock method. Currently, for all periods presented, diluted net loss per share is the same as basic net loss per share as the inclusion of weighted average shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of warrants would be anti-dilutive.

The following table summarizes the number of securities outstanding at each of the periods presented, which were not included in the calculation of diluted net loss per share as their inclusion would be anti-dilutive:

Property, Plant and Equipment

Depreciation of property, plant and equipment is on a straight line basis beginning at the time it is placed in service, based on the following estimated useful lives:

Leasehold improvements are depreciated over the lesser of the remaining term of the lease or the life of the asset (generally three to five years).

Expenditures for major renewals and betterments that extend the useful lives of property and equipment are capitalized. Expenditures for maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred.  Equipment has not been placed into service as of March 31, 2012.

Intangible Assets

Intangible assets, such as acquired in-process research and development costs, are considered to have an indefinite useful life until such time as they are put into service at which time they will be amortized on a straight-line basis over the shorter of their economic or legal useful life.  Management evaluates indefinite life intangible assets for impairment on an annual basis and on an interim basis if events or changes in circumstances between annual impairment tests indicate that the asset might be impaired. The ongoing evaluation for impairment of its indefinite life intangible assets requires significant management estimates and judgment.  Management reviews definite life intangible assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. There were no impairment charges in 2012.

Fair Value Measurement

Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. The fair value hierarchy prescribed by the accounting literature contains three levels as follows:

           Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.       

    Level 2 Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

           Level 3 Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities. Level 3 assets and liabilities include financial instruments whose value is determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, as well as instruments for which the determination of fair value requires significant management judgment or estimation.

In addition, GAAP requires the Company to disclose the fair value for financial assets on both a recurring and non-recurring basis.

At March 31, 2012, the Company has issued warrants and options valued at $192,007 to non-employees for services and subscription rights valued at $11,040,000 for the purchase of assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis.  The fair value of the warrants and subscriptions rights was determined based on an appraisal which used the Black-Scholes model whose assumptions are considered by management to be level 3 inputs.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08, Guidance on Testing Goodwill for Impairment.  ASU 2011-08 gives entities testing goodwill for impairment the option of performing a qualitative assessment before calculating the fair value of a reporting unit in Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test.  If entities determine, on the basis of qualitative factors, that the fair value of a reporting unit is more likely than not less than the carrying amount, the two-step impairment test would be required.  Otherwise, further testing would not be needed.  ASU 2011-08 will be effective for fiscal and interim reporting periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2011.  The adoption of this accounting standard did not have a material effect on the Company's financial statements.

In July 2012 the FASB issued new ASU No. 2012-02, Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment (the revised standard).  The revised standard is intended to reduce the cost and complexity of testing indefinite-lived intangible assets other than goodwill for impairment.  It allows companies to perform a "qualitative" assessment to determine whether further impairment testing of indefinite-lived intangible assets is necessary, similar in approach to the goodwill impairment test.  The revised standard is effective for annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012. Early adoption is permitted.  The Company will adopt this new standard in 2013.

        There are currently no other accounting standards that have been issued that will have a significant impact on the Company's financial position, results of operations or cash flows upon adoption.

NOTE 2 – ASSET PURCHASE

The Company purchased certain assets from Apollo Diamond Inc. (“ADI”) on August 31, 2011, consisting primarily of diamond growing machines and certain intellectual property related thereto.  The purchase price consisted of an aggregate of $2,000,000 in a combination of cash and a promissory note bearing interest at 4.00% annually and due and owing in full on September 1, 2012, plus subscription rights for certain current and former stockholders of ADI to acquire approximately 16 million shares of common stock of the Company for $0.01 per share (the “ADI Offering”).  The Company has estimated the fair value of such rights to acquire shares of common stock of the Company for $0.01 per share to be $0.69 per right.  At the date of the transaction, the fair value of the subscription rights was $11,040,000, and this amount was credited to additional paid-in capital. The fair value of the subscription rights was determined using the Black-Scholes model with the following assumptions: estimated volatility of 100% , risk free interest rate of 0.1%, and an expected life of 1 year.

The following table reflects our purchase price allocation of the assets:

The Company completed a third-party valuation to determine the fair value of the assets acquired.  The final amounts allocated to the assets acquired are based upon the results of that valuation appraisal.

NOTE 3 – INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Intangible assets consist of the following:

NOTE 4 – NOTES PAYABLE

In conjunction with the purchase of certain assets from ADI on August 31, 2011, the Company entered into a promissory note bearing interest at 4.00% annually and due and payable in full on September 1, 2012.  As of March 31, 2012, $125,000 of the promissory note to ADI remained unpaid.

NOTE 5 – CAPITAL STOCK

The authorized capital of the Company is 75,000,000 common shares with a par value of $ 0.001 per share.

In December 2009, the Company issued 2,000,000 shares of common stock, post 2-for-1 forward split, at a price of $0.002 per share for total cash proceeds of $4,000.

In January through March 2010, the Company issued 4,400,000 shares of common stock, post 2-for-1 forward split, at a price of $0.005 per share for total cash proceeds of $22,000.

During the three months ended September 30, 2011, the Company issued 18,717,570 shares of common stock.  On August 5, 2011, 3,200,000 shares were issued in a 2-for-1 forward split from Krossbow Holding Corp. shareholders.  As part of a private placement, 2,517,570 shares were issued at a price of $0.70 per share for total cash proceeds, net of fees, of $1,679,064.  13,000,000 shares were issued at a market value price of $0.02 per share purchasing the name “Scio Diamond Technology Corporation” (“the Scio name”) for a total purchase price of $260,000.  The Company purchased the Scio name from a privately-held Nevada corporation (“Private Scio”) that also had the Scio name.  The Company and Private Scio are entities under common control.  Accounting Standards Codification 805-50-30-5 states that when accounting for a transfer of assets between entities under common control, the entity that receives the asset shall initially measure the recognized asset at the carrying amount in the accounts of the transferring entity at the date of the transfer.  As the Scio name acquired had no carrying value, the value of the shares given to purchase the Scio name were recorded as a deemed distribution so that the accounting basis of the Scio name remained at zero.  In addition, the Company issued 16 million subscription rights with an exercise price of $0.01 per share to certain current and former stockholders of ADI as part of the asset purchase discussed in Note 2.

During thethree months ended December 31, 2011, the Company issued 3,908,000 shares at a price of $0.70 per share for total cash proceeds, net of fees, of $2,672,059.  In January 2012, the Company issued 187,500 shares of common stock at a share price of $0.70 for total cash proceeds of approximately $94,499.  The Company has 26,013,070 shares of common stock issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2012.

As of March 31, 2012 the Company had 370,014 warrants outstanding with exercise prices of $.70 per share. The warrants expire in 2016 and 2017.  The warrants were issued by the Company as compensation for consulting work and valued at $.52 per warrant using the Black-Scholes model.

NOTE 6 – OTHER INCOME

During the year ended March 31, 2012, the Company received grants totaling $75,000 as incentive for locating its production facilities in Greenville, South Carolina. At March 31, 2012, the Company had met all conditions with respect to the grants and accordingly has included them in other income for the period ended March 31, 2012.

NOTE 7 – OPERATING LEASES

The Company leases office space at locations in Hudson, Massachusetts and Greenville, South Carolina.  Under the terms of the leases, the Company is obligated to pay escalation rentals for certain operating expenses and real estate taxes.  The Company also leases electrical equipment in its production facility in South Carolina.  Minimum future rental payments under the leases are summarized as follows:

Years ending March 31:

2013                                $389,945

2014                                 352,545

2015                                 318,045

2016                                 381,516

2017 and thereafter      $732,798                                

NOTE 8 - RELATED PARTIES

Accounts payable at March 31, 2012 included $131,984 owed to AdamsMonahan, LLP, a firm in which our board members, Edward S. Adams and Michael R. Monahan, are partners.  For the year ended March 31, 2012 and for the period September 17, 2009 (inception) through March 31, 2012, the Company incurred expenses of $239,988 for professional and consulting services provided by AdamsMonahan, LLP.  For the year ended March 31, 2011, the Company did not incurexpenses for professional and consulting services provided by AdamsMonahan, LLP.

On August 5, 2011, the Company executed the Scio Asset Purchase Agreement with another privately-held Nevada corporation that also had the name “Scio Diamond Technology Corporation” (“Private Scio”).  Under the terms of the Scio Asset Purchase Agreement, the Company purchased the name “Scio Diamond Technology Corporation” and acquired other rights from Private Scio for 13,000,000 newly issued shares of common stock of the Company.  Our directors Edward S. Adams and Michael R. Monahan were directors of Private Scio and Joseph D. Lancia was an officer of Private Scio, and they owned 31.5%, 31.5% and 15.4%, respectively, of Private Scio.  At the time that the Scio Asset Purchase Agreement was executed, our directors Edward S. Adams and Michael R. Monahan had control of the Company.  Edward S. Adams and Michael R. Monahan each acquired, directly or indirectly, 4,100,000 shares of our common stock pursuant to the Scio Asset Purchase Agreement, and Joseph D. Lancia acquired 2,000,000 shares pursuant to the Scio Asset Purchase Agreement.

The Company purchased certain assets from ADI on August 31, 2011, consisting primarily of diamond growing machines and intellectual property related thereto.  The purchase price consisted of an aggregate of $2,000,000 in a combination of cash and a promissory note bearing interest at 4.00% annually and due and owing in full on September 1, 2012, plus the opportunity for certain current and former stockholders of ADI to acquire approximately 16 million shares of common stock of the Company for $0.01 per share.  These rights were valued at $11,040,000 in total using the Black-Scholes option pricing model.  Both Mr. Adams, in an executive role, and Mr. Monahan previously served in various capacities with ADI through early 2011.

NOTE 9 – INCOME TAXES

There was no current or deferred tax expense (benefit) for the years ended March 31, 2011 and 2012.

The deferred tax asset (liability) at March 31, 2011 and 2012 consists of the following types of temporary differences and their related tax effects:

The Company recorded a valuation allowance against its net deferred tax asset at March 31, 2012 and March 31, 2011, as the Company believes that it is more likely than not that this asset will not be realized.

At the end of 2012, the Company had federal and state net operating loss carry-forward (“carry-forward”) in the amount of approximately $41,000 that expires beginning in the year 2031.

NOTE 10 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

Beginning in April 2012 through June 30, 2012, the Company issued 2,538,750 units each consisting of one share of common stock and one warrant for the purchase of a share of common stock at an exercise price of $1.60 for a unit price of $0.80 for total net cash proceeds of approximately $1,999,920.  As of the date of this filing, the total number of units issued is 4,458,750 for net cash proceeds of $3,522,760.

On May 7, 2012, the Company implemented equity compensation arrangements for our executive officers and several key employees. These included grant agreements wit certain of its executive officers pursuant to which such executive officers were granted options to purchase shares of the Company's common stock. Under certain of the agreements, the Company granted options with each such option bieng subjet to the achievement of certain performance milestones by the Company. Under certain of the agreements, the Company also granted options with each of these options vesting immediately upon execution of such agreements. The options are intended to qualify as incentive stock options within the meaning of Section 422A of the Internal Revenue Code. The exercise price for each option is $0.70 per share. The options on the last business day proceeding the three year anniversary of the grant date unless fully exercised or terminate earlier.

On June 5, 2012, the Company acquired substantially all of the assets of Apollo Diamond Gemstone Corporation (“ADGC”) (the “ADGC Asset Purchase”), consisting primarily of cultured diamond gemstone-related know-how, inventory, and various intellectual property, in exchange for $100,000 in cash and the opportunity for certain current and former stockholders of ADGC that are accredited investors to acquire up to approximately 1 million shares of common stock of the Company for $0.01 per share (the “ADGC Offering”) with the intent that ADI Offering be conducted substantially concurrently with the ADGC Offering (collectively, the “ADI/ADGC Stockholder Offering”).  The ADI/ADG Stockholder Offering began in June and is expected to close on or about August 30, 2012.

On July 24, 2012, the Company announced that it had signed a purchase order with an international supplier of precision diamond cutting tool products pursuant to which the Company will be providing CVD single crystal diamond in specified wafer sizes.  The purchase order calls for near term Company sales of an estimated minimum of $1,000,000, with such sales to occur in the second and third fiscal quarters of the fiscal year ending March 31, 2013, and under certain circumstances and depending upon, among other things, ongoing demand as estimated by the end product manufacturer, could produce aggregate sales by the Company of up to an estimated $5,000,000 during the first 24 months of the order.

    The Company, certain directors and others were served with a complaint in August 2012 filed by a former shareholder of Apoolo Diamond, (ADI) The complaint alleges certain security and other law violations in connection with the ADI Asset Purchase (see note). The claimant seeks damages to the established at trail and has not specified monetary damages.

On August 3, the Company entered into amended and restated employment agreements and change in control agreements with our executive officers.  In addition, the Company authorized equity compensation arrangements for our executive officers and adopted an amended and restated Code of Ethics and Business Conduct.

On August 13, 2012, the Company named Bernard M. McPheely to the Board of Directors.