*** P7 June 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

PFI examination procedures include

-Casting all the figures for accuracy
-Comparing past forecast to latest FS to determine reasonableness of forecast.
-review seasonal variation considering productive and non productive periods to identify significant anomalies.
-comparing accouting policies to those used in forecast to determine if correctly applied.
-review timing….eg some expenditure for the cinema won’t have been done by the time they were accounted for in the forecast.
-review the assumptions used for reasonableness
-review loan agreements to determine if the loan will be received
– discuss with senior management to determine if the forecast is only for limited use(bank loan) or general use (website or publication)
-calculate ratios and agree to past FS to identify any significant differences and discuss with management
– compare sales revenue growth to industry growth and market expectations in publication or cinema industry magazines to assess reasonbleneas of assumptionswOTHER general enquiries include…
-Period covered by the forecast…4 years too long..less acceptable and reliable
No tax in the forecast….enquire from management.
Interest payments, dividend payments…etc.

These were the procedures I wrote..hope it helps.

Relatively the exam was good but still there is time pressure reflected on completing the exam on time .

based on the materiality level of items included in the the trade receivable & provision requirement which was UN provided & hence causes to understate payable & overstate profit, b/s of materiality of the items disagreement qualified opinion using through except for
may be suffice.

basis of disclaimer opinion has not properly outlined , it is not also adequately explained the quantification of the qualification
the non provision of of the probable out flow of resources for the provision also not mentioned
not fairly presented can not be the sufficient evidence for disclaimer audit opinion rather the material & pervasiveness of non available adequate evidence would have been the cause

opinion paragraph should have been outlined as disclaimer audit opinion below the basis of opinion paragraph, while it is merged with the bases of opinion

it said the f/s materially misstated & hence qualified opinion was appropriate, since the f/s as a whole was not misleading
in the emphasis of matter paragraph it is inappropriately mentioning the non provision of the legal claim , which should have been disused in the basis of qualified opinion