Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA AA Exams › Question
- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by Ken Garrett.
- AuthorPosts
- April 17, 2018 at 4:00 pm #447773
Sir there is a question in kit that
You are a manager in spring and co. You are reviewing the audit file of autumn co which is nearing completion. You have noticed similar issues during your review. Several working papers have not been signed as reviewed. You are aware that a review has taken place but it is not documented on the audit file. 1 audit working paper states that a sample of 30 purchase invoices should be tested but the results of the test only 25 invoices were tested. Several other areas document that samples sizes were reduced in order to save time . In the subsequent events review section of the file the audit senior documented that they have inquired of management that whether there have been any subsequent events and were told that there have not been any. No further work was considered necessary as a result.
Which of the following is not a reason for having quality standards such as ISA 220 which auditors must follow?
a. To reduce the risk of issuing an inappropriate audit opinion
b. To maintain confidence in audit process and audit profession
c. To increase the amount of regulation for auditors to follow
d. To protect firm’s reputation and minimizes the risk of law suit brought against the audit firm.Correct ans is C, but please explain me
Which of the following are true in respect of review of audit working papers?
a. All team members work should be reviewed by some one of manager level or above
b. All team members work should be reviewed by audit partner
c. All team members work should be reviewed by someone other than the preparer
d. All team members work should be revised by someone more senior than the preparer.Correct ans is D, but please explain me
April 17, 2018 at 7:20 pm #4478191 Why would anyone simply want to increase regulation? There has to be a purpose.
2 Reviewing usually works as a hierarchy. The reviewer does not have to be immediately above. Partners might not have time to review everyone in detail. (c) is almost right, but the reviewer should be more senior.
April 17, 2018 at 8:16 pm #447831All team members work should be reviewed by some one of manager level or above. Sir this point I still did not understand
April 17, 2018 at 10:10 pm #447852A supervisor could review a subordinate’s work
- AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘Question’ is closed to new replies.