Plagiarism Checker X Originality

Report
Similarity Found: 31%

Date: Friday, November 08, 2019

Statistics: 1775 words Plagiarized / 5769 Total words
Remarks: Medium Plagiarism Detected - Your Document needs Selective
Improvement.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

/ SUMMER TRAINING PROJECT REPORT “INTERNAL AUDIT – Labotech

Microscopes India Pvt. Ltd” SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MASTER’S DEGREE IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION OF
CHANDIGARH UNIVERSITY, GHARUAN, MOHALI SUBMITTED TO: INTERNAL
GUIDE EXTERNAL GUIDE Name: Mr. Aman Jindal Name: Mr.

Vagish Sharma Designation: Assistant Professor Designation: Chartered

Accountant Chandigarh University Company Name: Labotech Microscopes
Gharuan, Mohali India Pvt. Ltd Location: Ambala Cantt Submitted by: Nutan
Rawat 18MBA1296 CHANDIGARH UNIVERSITY, GHARUAN, MOHALI Batch: 2018-
2020
 STUDENT DECLARATION I Nutan Rawat do hereby declare that this project work
entitled Internal Audit – Labotech Microscopes India Pvt. Ltd.

is an outcome of my study and is submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirement for the award of the degree of Masters of Business Administration,
Chandigarh University. I also declare that this report has not been submitted by
me fully or partially for the award of any degree, diploma, title, recognition or any
other fellowship of any other university before.

Nutan Rawat Place: Date: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT It is a pleasure to acknowledge

many people who knowingly and unwittingly helped me, to complete my project.
First of all let me praise god for all the blessings. I Nutan Rawat, particularly
indebted to Mr. Aman Jindal, which inculcated in me utmost respect for humus
Values and groomed me up in the field of software technology to take on the
challenge of the competitive world. First & foremost, I would like to express my
regards to Mr. Vagish Sharma.

His constant encouragement and support, I would like to express my immense

gratitude towards all the work for providing the invaluable knowledge, guidance,
encouragement, extended during the completion of this project. I extend my
sincere gratitude to all my teachers and guide who made unforgettable
contribution. Due to their sincere efforts I was able to excel in the work entrusted
upon me.

Last but not the least; I am grateful to my parents, my sister, my friends, and all
well-wishers for their moral support and encouragement during last 40 days.
Nutan Rawat
 INDEX S.no. TOPIC PAGE NO. 1. INTRODUCTION I 2. STUDENT DECLARATION Ii
3. CERTIFICATE iii 4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Iv 5. INDEX V 6. CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION 7. CHAPTER-2 RESEARCH METHADOLOGY 8. CHAPTER-3
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 9.

CHAPTER-4 FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS 10. BIBLIOGRAPHY 11. ANNEXURE-1

QUESTIONNAIIRE CHAPTER – 1 INTRODUCTION Introduction of the Company:
Labotech Microscopes India Private Limited is a Private incorporated on 06
February 1997. It is classified as Non-govt company and is registered at Registrar
of Companies, Delhi. Its authorized share capital is Rs.

5,000,000 and its paid up capital is Rs. 4,955,200. It is involved in Manufacturing.

Labotech Microscopes India Private Limited's Annual General Meeting (AGM) was
last held on 29 September 2018 and as per records from Ministry of Corporate
Affairs (MCA), its balance sheet was last filed on 31 March 2018.

Directors of Labotech Microscopes India Private Limited are Pankaj Jain, Natasha
Jain, Narendra Kumar Jain and Neeraj Jain.

Labotech Microscopes India Private Limited's Corporate Identification Number is

(CIN) U36999DL1997PTC084940 and its registration number is 84940.Its Email
address is manish@labomedindia.com and its registered address is FLAT NO.

6, GAURI APARTMENTS, 3-4, RAJESH PILOT LANE, NEW DELHI DL 110011

Current status of Labotech Microscopes India Private Limited is - Active.

Company Details CIN U36999DL1997PTC084940 Company Name LABOTECH

MICROSCOPES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Company Status Active Registration
Number 84940 Company Category Company limited by Shares Company Sub
Category Non-Govt company Class of Company Private Date of Incorporation
06 February 1997 Age of Company 22 years, 8 month, 18 days Share Capital
Authorised Capital ?5,000,000 Paid up capital ?4,955,200 INTRODUCTION OF
THE TOPIC – INTERNAL AUDIT Internal auditing is an independent, objective
assurance and consulting activity designed to add value and improve an
organization's operations.

It helps an organization accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic,

disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk
management, control, and governance processes. Internal auditing is a catalyst
for improving an organization’s effectiveness and efficiency by providing insight
and recommendations based on analyses and assessments of data and business
processes.

With commitment to integrity and accountability, internal auditing provides value

to governing bodies and senior management as an objective source of
independent advice. Professionals called internal auditors are employed by
organizations to perform the internal auditing activity. The scope of internal
auditing within an organization is broad and may involve topics such as the
efficacy of operations, the reliability of financial reporting, deterring and
investigating fraud, safeguarding assets, and compliance with laws and
regulations.

Traditionally, internal auditing involved measuring compliance with the entity's

policies and procedures. However, internal auditors are not responsible for the
execution of company activities; they advise management and the Board of
Directors (or similar oversight body) regarding how to better execute their
responsibilities.

As a result of their broad scope of involvement, internal auditors may have a

variety of higher educational and professional backgrounds. Developments in
internal auditing have moved away from "compliance" which is a function of
management control, towards Risk Based Internal Auditing (RBIA) which results in
monitoring and evaluation of the risk based control framework to manage
enterprise risk.

The modern approach seeks to ensure that key risks are identified, a risk appetite
is defined, and controls are instigated in a fit for purpose way to manage risk
according to the risk appetite of the organisation. Internal audits evaluate a
company’s internal controls, including its corporate governance and accounting
processes. They ensure compliance with laws and regulations and help to
maintain accurate and timely financial reporting and data collection.

Internal audits also provide management with the tools necessary to attain
operational efficiency by identifying problems and correcting lapses before they
are discovered in an external audit. Internal Audit Process Internal auditors
generally identify a department, gather an understanding of the current internal
control process, conduct fieldwork testing, follow up with department staff about
identified issues, prepare an official audit report, review the audit report with
management, and follow up with management and the board of directors as
needed to ensure recommendations have been implemented.

Assessment Techniques Assessment techniques ensure an internal auditor

gathers a full understanding of the internal control procedures and whether
employees are complying with internal control directives. To avoid disrupting the
daily workflow, auditors begin with indirect assessment techniques, such as
reviewing flowcharts, manuals, departmental control policies or other existing
documentation. If documented procedures are not being followed, direct
discussion with department staff may be necessary.

Analysis Techniques Auditing fieldwork procedures can include transaction

matching, physical inventory count, audit trail calculations, and
account reconciliation as is required by law. Analysis techniques may test random
data or target specific data, if an auditor believes an internal control process
needs to be improved. Reporting Procedures Internal audit reporting includes a
formal report and may include a preliminary or memo-style interim report.

An interim report typically includes sensitive or significant results the auditor

thinks the board of directors needs to know right away. The final report includes
a summary of the procedures and techniques used for completing the audit, a
description of audit findings, and suggestions for improvements to internal
controls and control procedures. The formal report is reviewed with management
and recommendations for improvement are discussed.

Follow up after a period of time is necessary to ensure the new recommendations

have been implemented and have improved operating efficiency. Role in internal
control The role of internal audit is to provide independent assurance that an
organization’s risk management, governance and internal control process are
operating effectively. Internal auditor’s deal with issues that is fundamentally
important to the survival and prosperity of any organization.

Unlike external auditors, the look beyond financial risks and statements to
consider wider issues such as the organizations reputations, growth, its impact on
the environment and the way it treats its employees. Internal auditors have to be
independent people who are willing to stand up and be counted. Their employers
value them because they provide an independent, objective and constructive
view. To do this they need a remarkably varied mix of skills and knowledge.

They might be advising the projective running a difficult change programme one
day, or investigating a complex overseas fraud the next. From very early on in
their careers, they talk to executives at the very top of the organization about
complex, strategic issues, which is one of the most challenging and rewarding
parts of their role Internal auditing activity is primarily directed at improving
internal control.

Under the COSO Framework, internal control is broadly defined as a process,

affected by an entity's board of directors, management, and other personnel,
designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of
objectives in the following internal control categories: • Effectiveness and
efficiency of operations. • Reliability of financial reporting. • Compliance with laws
and regulations. Management is responsible for internal control.

Managers establish policies and processes to help the organization achieve

specific objectives in each of these categories. Internal auditors perform audits to
evaluate whether the policies and processes are designed and operating
effectively and provide recommendations for improvement. Internal audit reports
Internal auditors typically issue reports at the end of each audit that summarize
their findings, recommendations, and any responses or action plans from
management.

An audit report may have an executive summary; a body that includes the specific
issues or findings identified and related recommendations or action plans; and
appendix information such as detailed graphs and charts or process information.
Each audit finding within the body of the report may contain five elements,
sometimes called the "5 C's": 1.

Criteria: What is the standard? The standard may be a company policy or other
benchmark. 2. Condition: What is the particular problem identified (difference
between criteria and actual status)? 3. Cause: Why did the problem occur (which
control over risk was missing - design effectiveness failure; or which control did
not execute as planned -operating effectiveness failure)? 4. Consequence: What is
the risk/consequence (or opportunity foregone) because of the finding? 5.

Corrective action: What should management do about the finding? What have
they agreed to do and by when? The recommendations in an internal audit
report are designed to help the organization achieve its goals, which may relate
to operations, financial reporting or legal/regulatory compliance. They may relate
to effectiveness (i.e., whether goals were met or compliance with standards was
achieved) or efficiency (i.e.,
whether the outputs were generated with minimum inputs). Audit findings and
recommendations also relate to particular assertions about transactions, such as
whether the transactions audited were valid or authorized, completely processed,
accurately valued, processed in the correct time period, and properly disclosed in
financial or operational reporting, among other elements.

INTERNAL AUDIT STURCTURE / CHAPTER – 2 RESEARCH METHADOLOGY

OBJECTIVES OF INTERNAL AUDIT:- 1. To determine reliability and integrity of
information; 2. To review operations or programs for consistency with established
management goals and objectives. 3. To assist members of the organization in
the effective and successful performance of their responsibilities by providing
them with analyses, appraisals, recommendations and other pertinent
information concerning the activities being reviewed.

METHODOLOGY To identify the areas that used to be audited by internal audit, it

is essential to carry out a relative risk ratings. This exercise is termed as risk
assessment. Methodology of risk assessment the risk assessment methodology
includes the following; (i) Understanding the business objectives- Being a senior
management team, the head of internal audit is well aware of the existing
systems, the control environment and risk factors of each operation / activity.

(ii) Finalization of the audit universe - Based on the experience and

understanding gained during the visits of various locations/ activities and
discussions with senior managerial personnel, the audit universe may be finalized.
(iii) Assigning a risk rating to each audit universe process/area - Risk rating is
used to prioritize auditable entities and to estimate the internal audit hours
considered necessary for an internal audit function to address the identified risks.

(iv) Assigning frequency for each audit area - The frequency of each audit is
determined based on the likelihood and materiality rating of each audit. (v)
Estimating systems understanding and documentation- the auditor should assess
the existing systems and documentation work before begins/commencing the
audit work of the department. . Research Methodology: The study is based on
survey method.

The primary data is collected by structured questionnaires to knowing the views,

comments and confidence regarding the performance of Internal Audit functions
in labotech microscopes india private limited. For the purpose of the study
executives of different departments were selected. The secondary data is
collected from the books, magazines/ journals, websites.
Research design: Exploratory type of Research Sample Size: 50 respondents Data
source: Primary data and secondary data. Schedule design: A well-structured
schedule comprising of close ended. Method of data collection: Primary data
were collected by the help of well-structured questions. Secondary data is
collected from the books, magazines/ journals, websites.

Analysis Technique: The data collected from the respondents were analysed using
standard statistical methods and techniques. Pie charts and bar diagrams were
used to reach at the conclusion. Findings were made on the basis of analysis.
Recommendations were made on the basis of findings drawn from various data
collected.

Application of SPSS CHI-SQUARE TEST A chi-squared test, also written as ?2 test,

is any statistical hypothesis test where the sampling distribution of the test
statistic is a chi-squared distribution when the null hypothesis is true. Without
other qualification, 'chi-squared test' often is used as short for Pearson's chi-
squared test.

The chi-squared test is used to determine whether there is a significant difference

between the expected frequencies and the observed frequencies in one or more
categories. In the standard applications of this test, the observations are classified
into mutually exclusive classes, and there is some theory, or say null hypothesis,
which gives the probability that any observation falls into the corresponding
class.

The purpose of the test is to evaluate how likely the observations that are made
would be, assuming the null hypothesis is true. Chi-squared tests are often
constructed from a sum of squared errors, or through the sample variance. Test
statistics that follow a chi-squared distribution arise from an assumption of
independent normally distributed data, which is valid in many cases due to
the central limit theorem. A chi-squared test can be used to attempt rejection of
the null hypothesis that the data are independent.

The outcomes are as follows:- Case Processing Summary Cases Valid Missing
Total N Percent N Percent N Percent audit_services * audit_outcomes 50
100.0% 0 .0% 50 100.0% This table tells us about the number of respondents
and the percentage of missing data. Here, the data from 50 respondents has
been collected & it has no missing values in it. Next table is of cross tabulation.
It shows us the association between the variables taken are audit services and
audit outcomes. audit_services * audit_out comes Cross tabulation
audit_outcomes Total 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 audit_services 1.00 Count 4 8 6 7 25
Expected Count 6.5 8.0 5.5 5.0 25.0 % within audit_services 16.0% 32.0% 24.0%
28.0% 100.0% 2.00 Count 9 8 5 3 25 Expected Count 6.5 8.0 5.5 5.0 25.0 %
within audit_services 36.0% 32.0% 20.0% 12.0% 100.0% Total Count 13 16 11 10
50 Expected Count 13.0 16.0 11.0 10.0 50.0 % within audit_services 26.0%
32.0% 22.0% 20.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value Df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.614a 3 .306 Likelihood Ratio 3.710 3 .295 Linear-by-Linear
Association 3.339 1 .068 N of Valid Cases 50 a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected
count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5.00.

NULL HYPOTHESIS: This hypothesis shows that there is no significant difference

or no variation between the variables taken. H0: There is no association between
‘audit services’ & ‘audit outcomes’. From above table, ‘P’ or significant value of
chi-square is 0.036 which is higher than 0.05. So, the null hypothesis is ACCEPTED
that there is no association between the variables ‘audit services’ & ‘audit
outcomes’.

The hiring of new employees does not depend on the branch they are not being
hired for nor on the product are they held responsible for. Symmetric Measures
Value Approx. Sig. Nominal by Nominal Phi .269 .306 Cramer's V .269 .306 N of
Valid Cases 50 Phi is a dimensional measure of Chi-square that tells us about
the strength of association. Here, significant value of Phi is .378 which means
there is 37.8% of association.

This all can be explained through the following BAR CHART: / ONE WAY ANOVA
A one-way ANOVA is a type of statistical test that compares the variance in the
group means within a sample whilst considering only one independent variable
or factor. It is a hypothesis-based test, meaning that it aims to evaluate multiple
mutually exclusive theories about our data.

A one-way ANOVA compares three or more than three categorical groups to

establish whether there is a difference between them. Within each group there
should be three or more observations (here, this means walruses), and the means
of the samples are compared. The outcomes of this test are as follows:
Descriptive N Mean Std. Deviation Std.

Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Minimum Maximum Lower Bound
Upper Bound exceeds expectations 20 1.7500 .85070 .19022 1.3519 2.1481 1.00
3.00 meets expectations 20 1.8500 .58714 .13129 1.5752 2.1248 1.00 3.00 does
not comment 10 1.5000 .70711 .22361 .9942 2.0058 1.00 3.00 Total 50 1.7400
.72309 .10226 1.5345 1.9455 1.00 3.00 This table tells us the mean, standard
deviation and sample size of the dependent variable.

Test of Homogeneity of Variances Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig. 3.921 2 47 .027
ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups .820 2 .410
.777 .466 Within Groups 24.800 47 .528 Total 25.620 49 NULL HYPOTHESIS:
This hypothesis shows that there is no significant difference among our group
means (Dependent variable) - H0: There is no association between ‘audit services’
& ‘audit outcomes’. From above table, ‘P’ or significant value of chi-square is
0.036 which is higher than 0.05.

So, the null hypothesis is ACCEPTED that there is no association between the
variables ‘expectations’ & ‘confidence’. Multiple Comparisons (I)
organizational_expectations (J) organizational_expectations Mean Difference (I-J)
Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound exceeds
expectations meets expectations -.10000 .22971 .901 -.6559 .4559 does not
comment .25000 .28133 .650 -.4309 .9309 meets expectations exceeds
expectations .10000 .22971 .901 -.4559 .6559 does not comment .35000 .28133
.434 -.3309 1.0309 does not comment exceeds expectations -.25000 .28133 .650
-.9309 .4309 meets expectations -.35000 .28133 .434 -1.0309 .3309 This table
shows that which group differ from each other.

In the above table organizational expectations and confidence differ with each
other. The significance level is more than 0.05. Confidence
organizational_expectations N Subset for alpha = 0.05 1 does not comment 10
1.5000 exceeds expectations 20 1.7500 meets expectations 20 1.8500 Sig. .392
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed. a. Uses Harmonic
Mean Sample Size = 15.000. b.

The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used. Type
I error levels are not guaranteed. / MANOVA (MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF
VARIANCE) This test is used when there are more than one DV & IDV. The
dependent variables should be of SCALE DATA and the independent variables
should be of CATEGORICAL data.

When there is only 1 IDV then one-way MANOVA is used and when there are
more than one IDV then n-way MANOVA is used. In this report, we have more
than 1 IDV, so, we have used n-way MANOVA. VARIABLES TAKEN:- 1) Dependent
Variables: a) audit services b) audit necessity 2) Independent Variables: a) right
audit structure b) improved risk c) proactive team The outcomes of the test are as
follows: Descriptive Statistics audit_services audit_necessity Mean Std.

Deviation N right_audit_structure Yes yes 2.9231 1.60528 13 no 2.8333 1.40346

12 Total 2.8800 1.48099 25 No yes 2.2308 1.23517 13 no 3.1667 1.64225 12
Total 2.6800 1.49220 25 Total yes 2.5769 1.44701 26 no 3.0000 1.50362 24
Total 2.7800 1.47482 50 improved_risk Yes yes 3.2308 1.36344 13 no 2.6667
1.43548 12 Total 2.9600 1.39881 25 No yes 3.0769 1.38212 13 no 2.7500
1.86474 12 Total 2.9200 1.60520 25 Total yes 3.1538 1.34736 26 no 2.7083
1.62799 24 Total 2.9400 1.49024 50 proactive_team Yes yes 7.0769 11.46343 13
no 2.0833 .99620 12 Total 4.6800 8.52311 25 No yes 2.9231 1.25576 13 no
1.9167 1.08362 12 Total 2.4400 1.26095 25 Total yes 5.0000 8.26559 26 no
2.0000 1.02151 24 Total 3.5600 6.13508 50 In the above table, shows the
highest mean value of the dependent variable with the independent variable.

The right audit structure with audit services and necessity saying yes is 2.92 which
is good for the organization and the people saying no is 3.16 which is also good,
both are equally balanced. Between-Subjects Factors Value Label N
audit_services 1.00 yes 25 2.00 no 25 audit_necessity 1.00 yes 26 2.00 no 24
The above table shows the number of responses by the respondent.

Box's Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices Box's M 112.615 F 5.503 df1 18

df2 7368.546 Sig. .000 Tests the null hypothesis that the observed covariance
matrices of the dependent variables are equal across groups. a. Design: Intercept
+ audit_services + audit_necessity + audit_services * audit_necessity H0: -is
rejected because the significance level is less than 0.05 Multivariate Tests Effect
Value F Hypothesis df Error df Sig. Partial Eta Squared Noncent. Parameter
Observed Power Intercept Pillai's Trace .908 144.006a 3.000 44.000 .000 .908
432.018 1.000 Wilks' Lambda .092 144.006a 3.000 44.000 .000 .908 432.018
1.000 Hotelling's Trace 9.819 144.006a 3.000 44.000 .000 .908 432.018 1.000
Roy's Largest Root 9.819 144.006a 3.000 44.000 .000 .908 432.018 1.000
audit_service Pillai's Trace .045 .694a 3.000 44.000 .561 .045 2.081 .185 Wilks'
Lambda .955 .694a 3.000 44.000 .561 .045 2.081 .185 Hotelling's Trace .047 .694a
3.000 44.000 .561 .045 2.081 .185 Roy's Largest Root .047 .694a 3.000 44.000
.561 .045 2.081 .185 audit_necessity Pillai's Trace .081 1.298a 3.000 44.000 .287
.081 3.894 .322 Wilks' Lambda .919 1.298a 3.000 44.000 .287 .081 3.894 .322
Hotelling's Trace .089 1.298a 3.000 44.000 .287 .081 3.894 .322 Roy's Largest
Root .089 1.298a 3.000 44.000 .287 .081 3.894 .322 audit_services *
audit_necessity Pillai's Trace .076 1.202a 3.000 44.000 .320 .076 3.605 .300 Wilks'
Lambda .924 1.202a 3.000 44.000 .320 .076 3.605 .300 Hotelling's Trace .082
1.202a 3.000 44.000 .320 .076 3.605 .300 Roy's Largest Root .082 1.202a 3.000
44.000 .320 .076 3.605 .300 a. Exact statistic b. Computed using alpha = .05 c.

Design: Intercept + audit_services + audit_necessity + audit_services *

audit_necessity This table shows the actual results of MANOVA. In this we have
to note down the values of Wilks’ Lambda and its’ significant value to know the
significance of IDVs on DVs. From the table, it can be seen, that the Wilks’
Lambda value for audit services is more significant (.045) than Keenness. Also, its
significant value is 0.000 which is less than 0.05. Therefore, it does not give effect
on dependent variable. Levene's Test of Equality of Error Variances F df1 df2 Sig.

right_audit_structure .884 3 46 .457 improved_risk 2.114 3 46 .111

proactive_team 3.191 3 46 .032 Tests the null hypothesis that the error variance
of the dependent variable is equal across groups. a. Design: Intercept +
audit_services + audit_necessity + audit_services * audit_necessity In this table, 2
different null hypotheses will be developed that the error value for all dependent
variables is equal across groups. The ‘P’ values for ‘audit structure’, ‘improved
risk’and ‘proactive team’ are .457, .111 and .032 respectively. So, the null
hypothesis will be accepted in the above cases which mean the error values for
dependent variables across all groups are not equal.

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Source Dependent Variable Type III Sum of

Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta Squared Noncent. Parameter Observed
Power Corrected Model right_audit_structure 6.016a 3 2.005 .917 .440 .056 2.752
.236 improved_risk 2.673c 3 .891 .386 .764 .025 1.158 .120 proactive_team
224.641d 3 74.880 2.127 .110 .122 6.380 .508 Intercept right_audit_structure
388.154 1 388.154 177.549 .000 .794 177.549 1.000 improved_risk 428.877 1
428.877 185.858 .000 .802 185.858 1.000 proactive_team 611.520 1 611.520
17.368 .000 .274 17.368 .983 audit_services right_audit_structure .402 1 .402 .184
.670 .004 .184 .070 improved_risk .016 1 .016 .007 .935 .000 .007 .051
proactive_team 58.241 1 58.241 1.654 .205 .035 1.654 .242 audit_necessity
right_audit_structure 2.234 1 2.234 1.022 .317 .022 1.022 .168 improved_risk
2.477 1 2.477 1.073 .306 .023 1.073 .174 proactive_team 112.320 1 112.320 3.190
.081 .065 3.190 .416 audit_services * audit_necessity right_audit_structure 3.282 1
3.282 1.501 .227 .032 1.501 .224 improved_risk .176 1 .176 .076 .784 .002 .076
.058 proactive_team 49.601 1 49.601 1.409 .241 .030 1.409 .213 Error
right_audit_structure 100.564 46 2.186 improved_risk 106.147 46 2.308
proactive_team 1619.679 46 35.210 Total right_audit_structure 493.000 50
improved_risk 541.000 50 proactive_team 2478.000 50 Corrected Total
right_audit_structure 106.580 49 improved_risk 108.820 49
proactive_team 1844.320 49 a. R Squared = .056 (Adjusted R Squared =
-.005) b. Computed using alpha = .05 c.

R Squared = .025 (Adjusted R Squared = -.039) d. R Squared = .122 (Adjusted R

Squared = .065) From the above table, it can be analysed that all the variable
that has significant effect on all the other variables i.e., audit structure, improved
risk and proactive team because here the significant value is .000 in all 3 case
which is less than .05.

VARIABLE VIEW / DATA VIEW / / / CHAPTER – 3 DATA ANALYSIS AND

INTERPRETATION Q1. Have you ever requested for specific services of the
Internal Audit function? Option No. of respondent Percentage (%) Yes 15 30 No
35 70 Total 50 100 / Interpretation From the above data, it is seen that 70%
people never requested for any specific service from Internal Audit department
whereas, 30% people have done so. Q2.

How do you judge the present Internal Audit activities towards improving the
performance of the organization? Option No. of respondent Percentage (%)
Excellent 20 40 Good 17 34 Average 10 20 Does not comment 3 6 Total 50 100
/ Interpretation Only 40% respondent responded as Excellent. Around 34% said
Good. Nearly 20% categorised it as Average. Rest 6% did not comment. Q3.

Taking into consideration the objectives and responsibilities of the internal Audit
functions, to what extent do you feel that Internal Audit meets expectations?
Option No. of respondent Percentage (%) Exceeds expectations 30 60 Meets
expectations 18 36 Does not comment 2 4 Total 50 100 / Interpretation 60%
respondents said that IA exceeds expectations. 36% said that it meets
expectations. Rest 4% did not comment anything. Q4.

How confident are you relying on the conclusions or recommendations through

the Internal Audit function? Option No. of respondent Percentage (%)
Completely confident 30 60 Somewhat confident 18 36 Not at all confident 2 4
Total 50 100 / Interpretation 36% responses somewhat confident. 4% are not at
all confident. 60% are completely confident. Q5.

To what extent do you trust the work of internal Audit improves the overall
internal control of the organization? Option No. of respondent Percentage (%)
Greatly Improve 21 42 Somewhat Improve 29 58 Does not improve 0 0 Not sure
0 0 Total 50 100 / Interpretation 42% respondents’ responses for great
improvement. 58% said somewhat improvement. No one response for does not
improve and not sure. Q6.

Do you believe that the work of Internal Audit helps in identifying and improving
the overall risk of the organization? Options No. of respondents Percentage (%)
Strongly agree 22 44 Agree 19 38 Neutral 9 18 Disagree 0 0 Strongly Disagree
0 0 Total 50 100 / Interpretation 44% respondents responded for strongly
agree. 38% said agree. 18% responded for neutral. No one responded for
disagree and strongly disagree. Q7.

Do you appreciate that internal audit team is proactive? Options No. of

respondents Percentage (%) Strongly agree 21 42 Agree 20 40 Neutral 9 18
Disagree 0 0 Strongly Disagree 0 0 Total 50 100 / Interpretation 18%
respondents’ responses for neutral. Around 40% responses for agree. 42% said
strongly agree.

No respondent responses for disagree and strongly disagree. Q8. Do you feel
that Audit report issued by Internal Audit department help the other departments
to improve the work of their department? Options No. of respondents
Percentage (%) Strongly agree 26 52 Agree 15 30 Neutral 9 18 Disagree 0 0
Strongly Disagree 0 0 Total 50 100 / Interpretation 52% respondents responses
for strongly agree. 30% responses for agree. Nearly 18% said neutral. No
respondent said disagree and strongly disagree.

Q9. How do you rate the quality of Internal Audit report issued by Internal Audit
Department? Options No. of respondents Percentage (%) Excellent 23 46 Good
18 36 Average 9 18 Poor 0 0 Very Poor 0 0 Total 50 100 / Interpretation There
are 48% respondents who said that the quality of report was excellent. 36% said
good. Around 18% responses for average. None of said very poor and poor. Q10.

How often your company conducts the internal audit programme? Options No.
of respondents Percentage (%) Half – yearly 0 0 Quarterly 0 0 Monthly 0 0
Once in a year 0 0 Concurrent 50 100 Total 50 100 / Interpretation All the
respondent’s responses for concurrent. No one responses for any other option.

CHAPTER – 4 FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS FINDINGS Major findings based on

data collected from the respondents are stated as follows: Internal Audit
Department is an independent department. Internal Audit activities improves the
performance of the organization. The expectations of the internal customers were
meet by the internal audit functions.
The overall internal control of the organization is improves by work of Internal
Audit. The report issued by IA department helps in improving the performances
of the departments. LIMITATIONS The survey was limited to few departments in
the organization. Unavailability of executives in their cabins as they were busy in
field work at that time.

Sampling error might have occurred because no sample in perfect representation

of a give population unless the sample size equals the population. There is a
possibility of false judgment due to the biased responses by some of the
executive’s staff while giving answers. Since the report is based on the primary
data, occurrence of personal biased cannot be ruled out. CHAPTER – 5
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES BIBLIOGRAPHY WEBSITES
https://www.tobabara.com/en/corporate-governance/internal-audit/structure-of-
internal-audit/ https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/internalaudit.asp
https://panjiva.com/Labotech-Microscopes-India-Pvt-Ltd/1336603 Annexure
QUESTIONNAIRE Q1.

Have you ever requested for specific services of the Internal Audit function? a)
Yes b) No Q2. How do you judge the present Internal Audit activities towards
improving the performance of the organization? a) Excellent b) Good c) Average
d) does not comment Q3.

Taking into consideration the objectives and responsibilities of the internal Audit
functions, to what extent do you feel that Internal Audit meets expectations? a)
Exceeds Expectations b) Meets Expectations c) Does not comment Q4. How
confident are you relying on the conclusions or recommendations through the
Internal Audit function? a) Completely confident b) Somewhat Confident c) Not at
all confident Q5.

To what extent do you trust the work of internal Audit improves the overall
internal control of the organization? a) Greatly Improve b) somewhat improves c)
Does not improves d) not sure Q6. Do you believe that the work of Internal Audit
helps in identifying and improving the overall risk of the organization? a) Strongly
agree b) Agree c) Neutral d) Disagree e) strongly disagree Q7.

Do you appreciate that internal audit team is proactive? a) Strongly Agree b)

Agree c) Neutral d) Disagree e) strongly disagree Q8. Do you feel that Audit
report issued by Internal Audit department help the other departments to
improve the work of their department? a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Neutral d)
Disagree e) strongly disagree Q9.

How do you rate the quality of Internal Audit report issued by Internal Audit
Department? a) Excellent b) Good c) Average d) Poor e) Very Poor Q10. How
often your company conducts the internal audit programme? a) Half-yearly b)
Quarterly c) Monthly d) Once in a year e) Concurrent

INTERNET SOURCES:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
<1% - https://www.slideshare.net/MuliyaManoj/nj-india-invest-pvtltd-39745296
<1% -
http://archive.org/stream/chandigarhcasefo00kukr/chandigarhcasefo00kukr_djvu.
txt
<1% -
https://www.academia.edu/8741291/A_STUDY_ON_FINANCIAL_PERFORMANCE_
USING_RATIO_ANALYSIS_AT_ING_VYSYA_BANK_PROJECT_REPORT_Submitted_To
_UNDER_THE_GUIDANCE_OF
<1% -
https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/123456789/4510/Assess
ment%20Of%20Trade%20Standards%20On%20Ethiopia%e2%80%99s%20Fresh
%20Fruit%20Export%20Volume.pdf?sequence=1
<1% - https://issuu.com/sanjaykumarguptaa/docs/a-comparative-analysis-of-
ulip-of-bajaj-allianz-li/2
<1% - https://www.vinayakamission.com/userfiles/phd/D863600007.pdf
<1% -
https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/6302/thesis_fulltext.pdf?
sequence=1
<1% - https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:990964/FULLTEXT01.pdf
<1% - https://www.zaubacorp.com/company/SEW-EURODRIVE-INDIA-PRIVATE-
LIMITED/U29268DL1997PTC084845
<1% - https://www.zaubacorp.com/company/LABOTECH-MICROSCOPES-INDIA-
PRIVATELIMITED/U36999DL1997PTC084940
<1% - https://www.zaubacorp.com/company/SUZUKI-MOTOR-GUJARAT-
PRIVATE-LIMITED/U34200GJ2014FTC079460
1% - https://global.theiia.org/about/about-internal-auditing/pages/about-
internal-auditing.aspx
1% - https://global.theiia.org/about/about-internal-auditing/pages/value-
proposition.aspx
3% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_audit
<1% - http://icmai.in/upload/Institute/Guidance_Notes/guide_not1.pdf
<1% -
http://www.deltaww.com/fileCenter/ir/download/govern/2011_auditing.pdf
4% - https://www.slideshare.net/debasishphukan/summer-training-project-
report-on-internal-audit-functions-and-its-performance-of-oil
1% - https://masumosman.blogspot.com/2012/12/auditing_29.html
<1% - https://www.quora.com/topic/Internal-Auditing
4% - https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/internalaudit.asp
<1% - https://www.interniaudit.cz/download/IIA/Evaluating-Internal-Control-
Systems.pdf
<1% - https://www.sajiveassociates.com/internal-audit#!
<1% - https://www.ansariauditors.com/internal-audit
<1% - https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-role-of-the-internal-audit-function-
in-corporate-governance
2% -
https://www.academia.edu/7664548/Study_of_Internal_Auditing_Functions_in_Ind
ian_Oil_Corporation_Ltd
<1% - https://yf-consultants.com/services/audit-assurance/
<1% - https://www.iia.org.uk/about-us/what-is-internal-audit/
<1% - https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/95116/1/MPRA_paper_95116.pdf
<1% -
https://www.finance.gov.mk/files/u10/COSO_Internal_Control_Integrated_framew
ork.pdf
<1% - https://quizlet.com/168009236/exam-3-practice-flash-cards/
<1% - http://www.asgpremier.com/internal-audit.html
<1% -
https://www.education.vic.gov.au/Documents/school/teachers/teachingresources
/social/personal/devperslearngoal.pdf
<1% - https://info.knowledgeleader.com/bid/164011/how-to-define-risk-
management-goals-and-objectives-in-your-organization
1% - https://internalaudit.summitoh.net/index.php/objectives
<1% - http://iia.org.au/sf_docs/default-source/quality/why-ia-is-important.pdf?
sfvrsn=2
<1% - http://www.ihmgwalior.net/pdf/research_methodology.pdf
1% - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-squared_test
<1% - https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-squared_test
<1% - https://answersdrive.com/what-is-the-significance-level-for-chi-square-
2814737
<1% - https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/comparing-the-
frequencies-of-2-groups-for-several-levels/td-p/264380
1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_test
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-squared_test
1% - https://wiki2.org/en/Chi-squared_test
<1% - https://stat.hevra.haifa.ac.il/~biostat/exe/home_exc7_sol1.pdf
<1% - https://pygot.wordpress.com/2018/06/28/hypothesis-testing-in-python/
<1% - https://www.slideshare.net/nadirmehmood58/audit-and-stat-final
<1% - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2996198/
<1% - https://www.slideshare.net/hashimabbasi786/qtia-report
<1% - http://oak.ucc.nau.edu/rh232/courses/EPS525/Handouts/Understanding
%20the%20One-way%20ANOVA.pdf
1% - https://www.technologynetworks.com/informatics/articles/one-way-vs-two-
way-anova-definition-differences-assumptions-and-hypotheses-306553
<1% - http://www0.sw.org/ome/faculty/pdf/IntroductionToStatistics.pdf
<1% - https://explorable.com/hypothesis-testing
<1% - https://acquia-prod.oswego.edu/psychology/sites/acquia-
prod.oswego.edu.psychology/files/oneway.pdf
<1% - https://www.coursehero.com/file/p2mn55r/b-The-group-sizes-are-
unequal-The-harmonic-mean-of-the-group-sizes-is-used-Type/
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multivariate_analysis_of_variance
<1% - https://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2018/01/anova-analysis-of-
variance/
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057%2Fjit.2011.25
<1% - https://quizlet.com/157022927/econometrics-lecture-2-bivariate-
regression-flash-cards/
<1% - https://quizlet.com/212276993/manova-and-dfa-flash-cards/
<1% - https://www.coursehero.com/file/p7jitm8/Partial-Eta-Squared-Noncent-
Parameter-Observed-Power-a-Computed-using-alpha-05/
<1% -
https://www.academia.edu/33901074/Statistics_II_Week_4_Assignment_T_Test_an
d_ANOVA_
<1% -
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLVMB_23.0.0/spss/tutorial
s/glmm_patlos_homcov.html
<1% -
http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/nursing/Documents/PDF/virtual-
crns/ancova-test.pdf
<1% - https://na.theiia.org/standards-guidance/topics/Pages/The-Internal-Audit-
Function.aspx
<1% - http://managementstudyguide.com/performance-management.htm
<1% - https://www.ey.com/en_gl/advisory/twenty-questions-to-enhance-your-
internal-controls
<1% -
https://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/surveys_statistics/econ/2019/k
ansas-retirement-savings-survey.doi.10.26419-2Fres.00334.001.pdf
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audit_committee
<1% - https://www.utsystem.edu/sites/default/files/offices/board-of-
regents/rules-regulations/31102.pdf
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_communication
<1% - http://s3-eu-west-
1.amazonaws.com/pub.housing.org.uk/MHCLG_Domestic_Abuse_Services_consult
ation_-_Fed_response.pdf
<1% - https://www.coursehero.com/file/p4kouak/A-Strongly-agree-B-Agree-C-
Neutral-D-Disagree-E-Strongly-disagree-5-To-what/
<1% - https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=9949