Star Ltd., a leading manufacturer of windmills in India, appointed M/s Shahi & Co., LLP of Chartered Accountants, as its statutory auditors for…

Star Ltd., a leading manufacturer of windmills in India, appointed M/s Shahi & Co., LLP of Chartered Accountants, as its statutory auditors for F.Y. 2023-24. During the audit, one of the audit team members, CA Ritik, was asked by the engagement partner to verify the ownership assertion of the company's inventories. To accomplish this, CA Ritik requested the concerned official of company to arrange for the audit team to attend the physical inventory count being conducted by the company. CA Ritik believed that attending the inventory count was the only way to check the ownership assertion related to the company's inventory. He discussed the matter with another audit team member, CA Pari. She had a different perspective. According to CA Pari, the correct course of action would be CA Ritik verifying the purchase requisition, purchase order, receiving reports, vendor invoices, inventory records, and payment files etc. as ownership assertion could not be verified simply by attending the physical inventory count. While verifying the creditors and purchases balances, CA Pari, have been satisfied with the internal control procedures related to purchases and creditors, and decides to check the creditors balance on a sample basis. She requested the management to provide a list of all the creditors, which included a total of 550 creditors. To determine the sample, CA Pari chose a sampling interval of every 11th creditor's balance, which results in a sample size of 50 creditors balances for the audit. During the audit, while verifying the share capital balance of the company, CA Ritik and CA Pari observed that there has been no change in the share capital raised by the company. CA Pari was of the view that since there has been no change in the share capital of the company, the audit team is not required to obtain any evidence with respect to the share capital balance. However, CA Ritik is of the opinion that they should obtain audit evidence even if there is no change in the company's capital structure during the year. According to him, such evidence can be a written confirmation from the accounts manager. Before finalising the audit report, the engagement partner asked CA Ritik to coordinate with the client company to request a written representation from management regarding their responsibilities and the information provided. However, CA Ritik refused to accept the representation, as it contained a qualifying language to the effect that representations are made to the best of its knowledge and belief, which according to him was not reasonable to accept. Based on the above facts, answer the following: