Aditya & Co. LLP are the statutory auditors of Benuka Furniture Ltd., a company engaged in the manufacture of wide range of office furniture…
CA Intermediate · Auditing and Ethics · RTP · May 2025
Aditya & Co. LLP are the statutory auditors of Benuka Furniture Ltd., a company engaged in the manufacture of wide range of office furniture that suits various workspaces ranging from home offices to corporate environments. The audit team is headed by CA Aditya, being the engagement partner who is further assisted by 2 articled assistants namely Rohit and Mudit. Before starting the audit work of the company, CA Aditya briefed the engagement team about the client's business, the various audit procedures the team can perform and the Standard on Auditing that the team needs to be complied with while conducting the audit of this company. While such discussions were going on, Mudit showed no inclination towards understanding the business and business environment of the company. He was of the view that as a member of the audit team he needs to obtain an understanding about the audit procedures to be performed during the course of audit and not about the client's business. Rohit was asked by CA Aditya to verify the trade receivables, loan and advances given by the company, amounting to 20 crore and 20 lakhs respectively. Rohit asked the concerned official of the company to provide him with the ageing of trade receivables. Rohit decided to send confirmation requests to debtors having balance as on the balance sheet date exceeding 5 lakhs. He further decided to request to the third party in the request letters to reply positively whether the balance in their books tallies with the balance mentioned in the request letters. Also, while verifying the balance of loans and advances given by the company, Rohit selected the sample for checking without following any structured approach though he made sure to avoid any conscious biasness or predictability. Thus, he made sure that all the individual balances constituting the total of loans and advances given by the company had a chance of selection. While checking the balances of fixed assets, Mudit asked the concerned employee of the company to provide him with various documents related to all the fixed assets appearing as on the balance sheet date. He asked for the title deeds with respect to the building owned by the company and the purchase bills for assets purchased by the company. While asking for such documents from the client company, Mudit was of the view that as a member of the audit team he can force the employee of the company to provide him with the required documents. Further with respect to the inventory of the company, Mudit performed the audit procedures to verify that any inventory balance as at the year end does not include any element of next financial year. Based on the above facts, answer the following MCQs:
Suggested Answer and Working Notes:
Correct Answer: Option (B)
The view of Mudit is not correct because while conducting an audit, the understanding of business and business environment of the client whose audit is to be conducted is very important.
Topics: Audit Report, Audit of Items of Financial Statements
Related Questions in this Topic
- "Using the Work of Another Auditor” is a critical area in the audit of entities having branches or components audited by...
- Explain the matters that are required to be stated in the “Auditor's Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Sta...
- Explain the factors that determine the type of modified opinion to be expressed by the auditor. In this context, explain...
- An audit firm is engaged to audit a company for the financial year 2025–26. The financial statements prepared by managem...
- RKS & Associates, Chartered Accountants, were appointed as statutory auditors of National Prosperity Bank Ltd. for the f...