Watch IT India Private Limited is a company engaged in business of manufacturing smart watches. The company had a slow start in the beginning as…

CA Intermediate · Auditing and Ethics · MTP · May 2024
Watch IT India Private Limited is a company engaged in business of manufacturing smart watches. The company had a slow start in the beginning as company's products were gaining traction with customers. However, momentum has picked up during the year. The company wants to appoint M/s Tripati & Associates, a CA firm as their auditor for year 2023-24 by replacing their existing auditors M/s Sreepath and Co. M/s Tripati & Associates are willing to accept the engagement. They communicated with previous auditors before accepting the engagement. However, M/s Sreepath and Co. have failed to respond. CA Kishan, partner of M/s Tripati & Associates explained to his team members about importance of Engagement letter. He also arranged a team discussion on matters relating to acceptance of terms of engagement. First point of consideration was concerning preconditions for an audit. Mr. Arun, a team member could recollect few of them. Those included determining whether financial reporting framework used in the preparation of financial statement is acceptable, management providing auditor with access to all relevant information and additional information upon auditor's request. It was further elaborated by Arun that management has to provide unrestricted access to employees within entity as may be required by auditor for obtaining audit evidence. Team members were asked to list factors that may necessitate revision of Engagement letter in case of recurring audits. Mr. Kumar, another team member replied that revision may be required in cases involving significant change in ownership, recent changes in senior management, change in financial reporting framework adopted in preparation of financial Statements, modest change in nature or size of the entity's business, change in legal and regulatory requirements etc. Mr. Ram, one of the team members raised a doubt. He enquired regarding recourse available to incoming auditor in case management makes it clear before acceptance of engagement by auditor regarding its inability in providing support to him in respect of certain procedures expected to be performed during course of audit. In this respect, specific question was raised relating to sending of confirmation requests to material trade payables reflecting in financial statements of a company. Trade payables pertain to material input and input services acquired and utilised by company during the year. Lack of support by management in such a case would, in effect, signify management's refusal to allow auditor to send confirmation requests at the outset before engagement is accepted by auditor. Based on above, answer the following questions:
(A) (A) The auditor needs to inquire into management's reasons for the refusal and perform alternative audit procedures to obtain relevant and reliable audit evidence.
(B) (B) The auditor needs to evaluate implications of management's refusal on auditor's assessment of risk of material misstatement and perform alternative audit procedures to obtain relevant and reliable audit evidence.
(C) (C) The auditor should not accept such an engagement.
(D) (D) The auditor needs to evaluate implications of management's refusal on risk of fraud and perform alternative audit procedures to obtain relevant and reliable audit evidence.

Suggested Answer and Working Notes:

Correct Answer: Option (C)

(C) The auditor should not accept such an engagement.

Topics: Audit Evidence, Risk Assessment and Internal Control

Open in Interactive Practice Hub · Full Practice Hub · Chapter Weightage · More in this subject

Related Questions in this Topic