• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Ask AI
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • CIMA Forums
  • Ask CIMA Tutor
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

20% off ACCA & CIMA Books

OpenTuition recommends the new interactive BPP books for March and June 2025 exams.
Get your discount code >>

Audit test

Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA AA Exams › Audit test

  • This topic has 5 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by Ken Garrett.
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • November 21, 2012 at 1:22 pm #55576
    keppel
    Member
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 2
    • ☆

    Dear tutor,

    I read from the book that for the trade receivables, where there are direct confirmations received and balances confirmed, and for the trade payables, where suppliers’ statements are available and the balances reconciled, there is no need to trace to the supporting documentations for sales like the GDN and the sales invoices & orders, and for purchases, the GRN and the purchase invoices and orders. Is this really the case?

    I would appreciate it if you would guide me on why the availability of the debtor’s confirmations and suppliers’ statements can save the auditors the troubles from going on to check the underlying documents for the balances?

    Thanks a lot.

    November 22, 2012 at 7:12 am #108253
    Ken Garrett
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 10
    • Replies: 10589
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Some of these documents would definitely be traced, for example to ensure that purchases had been ordered and goods received before the liability was accepted.

    November 22, 2012 at 8:54 am #108254
    keppel
    Member
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 2
    • ☆

    Dear Gromit,
    Thank you for your kind guidance.

    To ensure that purchases had been ordered and goods received before the liability was accepted, could this be verified only by performing transaction tests and cut-off test on purchases for testing against the occurrence of purchases and the complete recognition of liabilities respectively, whereas the trade payables balances, when checked against the suppliers statements, can satisfy the auditors as to the completeness of the purchases and the payable balance stated?

    Am I correct in the understanding in applying the directional testing so as to achieve audit efficiency?

    November 22, 2012 at 5:08 pm #108255
    Ken Garrett
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 10
    • Replies: 10589
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    I wouldn’t worry about directional testing in F8.

    Checking statements will test completeness, but might not properly verify existence eg if the invoices should not have been received and processed the liability would not truly exist.

    November 23, 2012 at 2:52 am #108256
    keppel
    Member
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 2
    • ☆

    Dear Gromit,

    Thank you for your kind guidance. I benefitted a lot from it.

    Regarding the inventories, if the stock level dropped sharply in the current year, despite an increase in turnover. There is then a risk of the inventory being understated. To address the risk, could I adopt the procedures like: (i) I would agree the balances per the inventory records to the inventories list and then to the ledger; (ii) carry out an inventory count; &enquire with the management why there is a fall in inventory; (iii) Check the unit cost of the inventories against the purchase invoice; Check the subsequent sales of the inventories to verify the NRV. (iv) Check against the GRN’s and GDNS near the year end? Am I correct?
    .
    And if a company simply counts the inventory periodically, say every month and then draw up a list of inventory, without keeping a full inventory records showing the inwards and outwards of inventories is this a weakness in the system? Under this system, what other procedure shall we do to check against the inventory?

    May I look forward to receiving your kind guidance again?

    November 23, 2012 at 7:55 am #108257
    Ken Garrett
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 10
    • Replies: 10589
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Para 1 = correct

    Para 2 = I think it is a bit of a weakness, but no worse than companies who keep no stock records at all and who simply count it at year end. I would suggest observing a test close to year end or ideally at year end.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In

Primary Sidebar

Donate
If you have benefited from our materials, please donate

ACCA News:

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant

Applied Skills exams is available NOW

ACCA Options:  “Read the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

ACCA CBE 2025 Exams

How was your exam, and what was the exam result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

PQ Magazine

Latest Comments

  • DuDE on Inventory Control (part 1) The EOQ Formula – ACCA Management Accounting (MA)
  • Nabiha on FA Chapter 2 Questions The Statement of Financial Position and Statement of Profit or Loss
  • John Moffat on The Statement of Financial Position – ACCA Financial Accounting (FA) lectures
  • Bainamura on The Statement of Financial Position – ACCA Financial Accounting (FA) lectures
  • kadamova.f@gmail.com on Associates (IAS 28) – PUPs – ACCA Financial Reporting (FR)

Copyright © 2025 · Support · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Comments · Log in