1.

Other inherent advantages of audit apart from enhanced credibility:

a. Risk management: Audits help identify and mitigate risks by evaluating the
effectiveness of internal controls and identifying potential weaknesses.

b. Compliance: Audits ensure that organizations comply with laws, regulations, and
contracts, which can help prevent legal issues and reputational damage.

c. Improved operations: Audits can lead to operational improvements by identifying

inefficiencies and recommending solutions.

d. Stakeholder confidence: Audited financial statements provide stakeholders,

including investors, lenders, and regulators, with confidence in the accuracy of
financial reporting.

e. Continuous improvement: Regular audits allow organizations to continually

evaluate their processes and make improvements to increase efficiency and
effectiveness.

2. Disadvantages of auditing:

a. Cost: Auditing can be expensive, particularly for large organizations with complex
operations or those that require frequent audits (e.g., public companies).

b. Disruption: The audit process can be disruptive to business operations as auditors

require access to records, personnel, and systems for extended periods of time.

c. Subjectivity: The interpretation of accounting rules and application of audit

judgments can be subjective, leading to inconsistencies between auditors or even
within the same audit team over time.

d. Time-consuming: The audit process is time-consuming, requiring significant

resources from both the organization being audited and the audit firm conducting the
engagement.

1
 e. Limited scope: Audits focus primarily on financial statements and internal
controls, providing only an assessment of financial reporting accuracy rather than a
comprehensive evaluation of an organization’s overall performance or risk profile.

3. Differences between auditing and accounting:

Auditing is an assurance service provided by professional accountants to evaluate the

accuracy, completeness, fairness, and reliability of financial information presented in
an organization’s financial statements or reports (internal or external). WHILE
Accounting refers to the recording, summarizing, analyzing, interpreting, classifying
transactions and reporting financial information in accordance with established
accounting principles (GAAP or IFRS). In other words, accounting deals with
recording transactions accurately while auditing ensures that those records are free
from material misstatements or errors that could impact stakeholders’ decisions based
on the reported information.

Key Differences Between Auditing and Accounting:

Purpose:

Accounting: The primary purpose of accounting is to record, summarize, and report

financial transactions on a day-to-day basis. Accountants focus on managing financial
data and ensuring compliance with tax laws.

Auditing: Auditing, on the other hand, is a periodic process that aims to verify the
accuracy and legality of financial statements prepared by accountants. Auditors
ensure that the financial statements present a true and fair view of the company’s
financial position

Nature of Work:

Accounting: Accountants are responsible for preparing financial statements, tracking

expenses and revenues, forecasting profits, and managing day-to-day bookkeeping
operations.

2
Auditing: Auditors verify the work done by accountants, examining financial
statements to detect errors, fraud, or intentional misstatements. They focus on
ensuring compliance with accounting principles and regulatory standards.

Skill Sets Required:

Accounting: Accountants need to be detail-oriented, focused on accuracy in financial

reporting, and well-versed in tax laws. They analyze financial records to provide
insights into an entity’s financial health.

Auditing: Auditors require strong investigative skills in addition to attention to detail.

They must be able to detect discrepancies in financial statements and uncover any
fraudulent activities through thorough examination.

Certifications:

Accounting: The dominant professional certification for accountants is the Certified

Public Accountant (CPA) designation. CPAs are recognized for their expertise in
accounting principles and tax regulations.

Auditing: While auditors may also hold CPA certifications, they may pursue
additional certifications specific to auditing standards, such as Certified Internal
Auditor (CIA) or Certified Information Systems Auditor (CISA).

Focus Areas:

Accounting: Accountants focus on providing accurate financial information for

decision-making purposes within an organization. They help stakeholders understand
the current financial status of the entity.

Auditing: Auditors focus on independently assessing the reliability of financial

information provided by accountants. Their role is crucial in ensuring transparency
and trust in financial reporting.

3
4. Distinctions between external and internal audit:

External audits are conducted by independent third-party firms engaged by

stakeholders such as shareholders or regulatory bodies to assess an organization’s
financial statements for compliance with applicable laws and regulations
(GAAP/IFRS) as well as internal control effectiveness in relation to risk management
objectives; they focus on providing reasonable assurance regarding financial
statement accuracy while also expressing opinions on going concern status if
appropriate (opinion being expressed either unqualified/unmodified/clean opinion or
qualified/modified/adverse opinion). Internal audits are performed by an
organization’s own staff members who evaluate its internal controls over financial
reporting (ICFR) processes against established policies and procedures aiming at
ensuring their adequacy in managing risks effectively; they focus on providing
assurance about whether risk management processes are operating effectively in
achieving stated objectives within an organization itself (not limited only to financial
reporting). Both types play essential roles in maintaining organizational transparency
& trustworthiness but serve different purposes due to their unique scopes &
perspectives.**

Independence: One of the key differences between external and internal audits is
independence. External auditors must be completely independent of the organization
being audited, while internal auditors work within the organization.

Focus: External audits primarily focus on financial statements and compliance with
external regulations, whereas internal audits have a broader scope that includes
operational efficiency, risk management, and compliance with internal policies.

Reporting Line: External audit reports are typically shared with shareholders and
regulatory bodies, providing assurance on the accuracy of financial statements to
external stakeholders. Internal audit reports are used internally by management to
improve operations and governance processes.

Purpose: The main purpose of an external audit is to provide assurance to external

stakeholders about the accuracy of financial statements, while internal audits aim to

4
add value to the organization by improving operations, risk management, and control
processes.

Frequency: External audits are usually conducted annually as required by regulatory

bodies or shareholders, while internal audits can be performed more frequently based
on the organization’s needs and risks.

Regulatory Requirements: External audits are often mandated by law or regulatory

bodies for certain types of organizations or industries, while internal audits are
considered a best practice for effective governance but may not be legally required in
all cases.

5. Meaning of “statutory auditing”: Statutory auditing refers to a mandatory

independent examination of an entity’s annual accounts performed by a qualified
external auditor under specific legislative requirements such as Companies Act 2013
for India or Sarbanes-Oxley Act for US public companies; it aims at ensuring
compliance with relevant laws & regulations while also providing stakeholders with
reliable assurance regarding the fair presentation of financial statements based on
generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP/IFRS). This type of audit is crucial
because it adds credibility to published financial reports while also protecting
investors from potential misstatements or fraudulent activities that could impact their
investment decisions.**

6. Users of audited financial statements & auditor’s report: Users include

investors seeking investment opportunities based on accurate information about a

company’s past performance & future prospects;

creditors extending loans requiring assurance about borrowers’ ability to repay

debts;

regulatory authorities monitoring compliance with applicable laws & regulations;

government agencies assessing tax liabilities; potential buyers evaluating targets

during mergers & acquisitions;

5
 employees looking into compensation schemes tied to stock options or bonuses
linked to profitability indicators like earnings per share (EPS); etc.

7. Expectation gap: The expectation gap refers to the disparity between what
stakeholders anticipate from an audit versus what it actually achieves;

This discrepancy may arise due to various reasons like differing perceptions about
the scope & purpose of an audit, lack of understanding regarding complex accounting
issues involved in preparing & presenting financial statements properly, or even
unrealistic expectations about detecting all fraudulent activities.

To narrow down this gap, it is essential for both stakeholders & auditors alike:

i) Clear communication: Clearly articulating what services are being offered

through transparent communication channels between all parties involved

ii) Setting realistic expectations: Setting clear goals & understanding limitations

iii) Continuous improvement: Regularly updating knowledge base on evolving

trends & best practices

iv) Education: Providing adequate training programs for stakeholders so they better
understand how external audits work

v) Transparency: Providing timely accessibility to relevant information needed for

effective decision making. By implementing these measures, we can bridge the
expectation gap more effectively. ** *

8. Auditors are not directly responsible for fraud. While they have a responsibility
to exercise professional skepticism during engagements, they cannot eliminate all
fraud risks entirely. Fraudulent activities often involve collusion between individuals
within organizations, which makes detection challenging even for experienced
auditors. However, auditors do play a crucial role in preventing fraud through their
expertise in identifying potential red flags, establishing effective internal
controls, and raising awareness among management about potential risks. It is
important for organizations themselves to prioritize anti-fraud measures such as

6
implementing strong governance structures, establishing robust internal
controls, fostering a culture that discourages fraudulent behavior, regularly educating
employees about ethical conduct, among other strategies.

9. Circumstances threatening ethical principles:

Here are five ethical threats and an example for each:

A. Self-interest threat: This arises when a personal financial gain or loss might
influence professional judgment.

Example: An accountant is pressured to approve a client's financial statements even

though they contain errors, because losing the client would mean a significant loss of
income for the accountant's firm.

B. Self-review threat: This occurs when someone reviews their own work or the
work they've been previously involved with, potentially overlooking errors.

Example: An engineer designs a bridge and then also approves the construction
plans without involving another engineer for review.

C. Familiarity threat: Close personal or business relationships with a client can

cloud judgment and make it difficult to be objective.

Example: A lawyer is representing a close friend in a legal case. This friendship

may make it difficult for the lawyer to maintain objectivity and act in the client's best
interests.

D. Advocacy threat: This happens when someone becomes too invested in a

particular outcome and promotes that outcome over a fair and balanced approach.

Example: A doctor working for a pharmaceutical company might downplay

potential side effects of a new drug during a presentation to a medical association.

E. Intimidation threat: This occurs when someone is pressured or threatened to act

unethically.

7
 Example: A manager threatens to fire an employee unless they falsify data in a
financial report.
10. Threats to Auditor Objectivity and Independence in Mr. Joseph's Findings:
a. Self-Interest Threat and Familiarity Threat:
Threat: The spouse of a partner has a business relationship with a client. This creates a
self-interest threat as the partner may pressure the firm to maintain the client to
benefit their spouse. Additionally, the familiarity between the client and the partner's
spouse could create a bias towards the client.
Impact: Objectivity and independence could be compromised. The auditors might
be hesitant to raise critical issues with the client for fear of jeopardizing the partner's
spouse's business relationship.
b. Self-Interest Threat and Advocacy Threat:
Threat: The audit manager is offered a future job with the client they are currently
auditing. This creates a self-interest threat as the manager may be inclined to
downplay issues to secure future employment. Additionally, the prospect of future
employment could lead to advocacy for the client's position.
Impact: Objectivity and independence are at risk. The manager might be less
critical during the audit and overlook potential problems to maintain a good
relationship with the client.

c. Intimidation Threat:
Threat: The client threatens to not reappoint the auditors if they disagree with the
client's accounting treatment. This is an intimidation threat as it pressures the auditors
to compromise their professional judgment.
Impact: Objectivity and independence are jeopardized. The auditors might be
hesitant to challenge the client's view to avoid losing the engagement.
d. Familiarity Threat:
Threat: The engagement partner has been with the client for six years. This creates a
familiarity threat as the long-standing relationship might make the partner less critical
of the client's practices.
Impact: Objectivity could be compromised. The partner might become too
comfortable with the client and overlook potential issues due to a lack of skepticism.

8
12. Benefits of Adequate Audit Planning:

Increased Efficiency: A well-defined plan avoids wasting time and resources during
the audit. It ensures everyone involved understands their tasks and the timeline.

Reduced Risk of Errors: Planning helps identify potential problem areas beforehand,
allowing for a tailored audit approach to mitigate risks of missing crucial information.

Improved Focus: A clear plan directs the audit towards the most important areas,
ensuring the audit focuses on critical aspects of the financial statements.

Enhanced Communication: Planning facilitates effective communication between

the audit team, client, and other stakeholders, ensuring everyone is on the same page
about the audit process.

Stronger Evidence Gathering: Planning helps determine the appropriate types and
amount of evidence needed to support the audit opinion, leading to a more robust
audit conclusion.

9
11. Threats to Dibal Associate's Independence and Safeguards:
In this scenario, there are three significant threats to independence and objectivity that
need to be safeguarded according to the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants:

10
11
12
12. Explanation of Audit Working Papers:
Audit working papers are documents prepared by auditors during the course of an
audit engagement to support their findings, conclusions, and recommendations. These
working papers serve as a detailed record of the audit procedures performed, evidence
obtained, and conclusions reached during the audit process.

Benefits of Maintaining Audit Working Papers:

Documentation of Audit Evidence: Audit working papers provide a documented

trail of the evidence gathered during the audit process. This documentation supports
the auditor’s findings and conclusions, ensuring transparency and accountability in
the auditing process.

Facilitation of Review Processes: Maintaining detailed working papers facilitates

review processes by allowing supervisors or external reviewers to understand the
auditor’s work more easily. Clear documentation helps reviewers assess the adequacy
of procedures performed and conclusions drawn during the audit.

Legal Compliance: Well-maintained working papers help auditors demonstrate

compliance with legal requirements related to auditing standards and regulations. In
case of disputes or legal challenges, these documents serve as crucial evidence to
support the auditor’s work.

Knowledge Transfer: Audit working papers also aid in knowledge transfer within an
auditing firm or organization. Future auditors can refer to these documents to
understand past engagements, learn from previous experiences, and improve their
own auditing practices.

Continuity and Consistency: Maintaining consistent and organized working papers

across different audits promotes continuity in auditing practices within an
organization. Standardized documentation formats help ensure that audits are
conducted consistently over time, enhancing efficiency and effectiveness.

13