Play your role as an excellant auditor and help me with solving the case below. And due to restriction of the number of words, I will explain the case by using several messages. So you should answer me after I send you questions.
The case is as below:
To reduce the procurement, production, and fixed costs, Toshiba outsourced a large portion of the business of designing, developing, and producing PCs to ODMs in Taiwan. Key PC parts including the Central Processing Unit (CPU), Hard Disk Drive (HDD), memory, Optical Disk Drive (ODD), and Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) were purchased by Toshiba or its wholly owned subsidiary, Taiwan Toshiba International Procurement Corporation (TTIP). The parts were then supplied to ODMs at the Masking Price, which was higher than the procurement cost of the parts (the ‘‘Parts Transaction’’). The use of masking prices prevented ODMs from knowing Toshiba’s procurement cost and eliminated the possibility of their leaking Toshiba’s input prices to its competitors. This was important because many of Toshiba’s competitors also used the same ODMs to outsource their PC production. 
The difference between the price that Toshiba (or TTIP) paid to its vendors and the price at which those parts were supplied to the ODMs was called the Masking Difference. For instance, if Toshiba’s procurement price was ¥50 and the parts were supplied to ODMs at ¥300, then the Masking Difference would be ¥250, and the masking ratio (computed by dividing the Masking Difference by the procurement price) would be 5.0 (250/50). The masking prices for the parts supplied to ODMs were stipulated by Toshiba without any negotiation. ODMs did not object because Toshiba agreed to repurchase all assembled PCs and any unused parts at the masking prices charged to the ODMs, and pay ODMs the stipulated processing/assembling charge. In other words, if PC production exceeded the quantity that Toshiba could sell, the remaining inventories were considered Toshiba’s responsibility. This shielded the ODMs from inventory risk.Using the parts supplied to them, the ODMs assembled PCs and shipped them back to Toshiba (or to TTIP), which in turn sold the PCs to Toshiba’s independent distributors in various regions. When the ODMs shipped the assembled PCs (the ‘‘Completed Products Transaction’’), they would invoice Toshiba (or TTIP) at the masking price that they had been charged, plus a processing/assembling charge (their profit). Together, the ‘‘Parts Transaction’’ and ‘‘Completed Products Transaction’’ were referred to within Toshiba as ‘‘Buy-Sell Transactions’’ and their combined effect on the profit was known as ‘‘Buy-Sell Profit.’’ Income recognition in Toshiba’s PC business was affected by the Masking Difference. When recording the ‘‘Parts Transaction,’’ Toshiba reduced the cost of goods manufactured by the amount of Masking Difference. Since most of the PCs were normally sold in the same period in which they were manufactured, a reduction in the cost of goods manufactured translated into an equivalent reduction in the cost of goods sold in the income statement. 
The Masking Difference was included in the accounts receivable when the ODMs were billed for the parts supplied to them. As an example, the supply of parts that cost Toshiba ¥50 and were invoiced to ODMs at a masking price of ¥300 would be reflected in Toshiba’s consolidated financial statements (ignoring transactions among affiliated entities) via the following summary journal entry: 
Accounts Receivable—ODM           300             
       Cost of Goods Manufactured     250                               
      Accounts payable—Parts Vendor  50                       
(Journal entry to record an increase in the receivables from ODMs of 300, a decrease in the cost of goods manufactured of 
250, and an increase in the accounts payable of 50) 
When Toshiba subsequently purchased the assembled PCs from ODMs (i.e., in the ‘‘completed products’’ transaction), the beneficial income effect of the Masking Difference recorded in the ‘‘parts transaction’’ was effectively removed because the amount recorded for the cost of goods manufactured included both the actual cost of the parts and the Masking Difference. As an example, if the ODMs charged TTIP ¥20 for assembling the PCs, and TTIP addedits processing charge [8]  of ¥10, the summary journal entry in the consolidated financial statements to record the receipt of assembled PCs would be: 
Cost of goods manufactured      330                      
       Accounts payable - ODM     320                                       
       TTIP income                          10                                        
(Journal entry to record an increase in the cost of goods manufactured of 330, increase in the payable to ODMs of 320, and to recognize TTIP income of 10) 
The combined effect of the ‘‘parts’’ and ‘‘completed products’’ transactions in Toshiba’s consolidated financial statements (i.e., the total effect of the two journal entries (1) and (2) above) after making payments to the ODMs [9]  and the parts vendors (ignoring transactions among affiliated entities) would be: 
Cost of goods manufactured       80
 Cash (paid to ODMs)                   20                                
   Cash (paid to Parts Vendor)      50                                    
      TTIP income                            10