Dean's Office Official Model Question Paper

Auditing Definition and Primary Objective

Auditing is the independent examination of financial statements of an entity, whether profit-oriented or not, conducted to express an objective, professional opinion on whether the financial statements present a true and fair view in all material respects in conformity with an applicable financial reporting framework (NFRS/NAS).

Internal vs. Statutory External Audit

• Internal Audit: An independent, continuous appraisal function established within an entity by management to review operational efficiency, internal controls, and risk governance.
• Statutory External Audit: An independent audit mandated by law (Companies Act 2063) conducted by an external licensed Chartered Accountant to report to shareholders on the truth and fairness of financial statements.

Audit Risk Model

Audit Risk (AR) is the risk that the auditor expresses an inappropriate audit opinion when financial statements are materially misstated:

$$\text{Audit Risk (AR)} = \text{Inherent Risk (IR)} \times \text{Control Risk (CR)} \times \text{Detection Risk (DR)}$$

Where $(\text{IR} \times \text{CR})$ represents the Risk of Material Misstatement (RMM).

Materiality (NSA 320)

Misstatements, including omissions, are considered material if they, individually or in the aggregate, could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of the financial statements.

Modified Audit Opinions

• Qualified Opinion (‘Except for’): Misstatements are material but not pervasive.
• Adverse Opinion: Misstatements are both material and pervasive, rendering financial statements misleading.
• Disclaimer of Opinion: The auditor is unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence, and the potential undetected effects are both material and pervasive.

Fundamental Principles of Professional Ethics for Auditors (ICAN Code)

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nepal (ICAN) enforces five fundamental ethical principles:

1. Integrity: Being straightforward, honest, and truthful in all professional and business relationships.
2. Objectivity: Not compromising professional or business judgment because of bias, conflict of interest, or undue influence of others.
3. Professional Competence and Due Care: Attaining and maintaining professional knowledge and skill at the level required to ensure that a client receives competent professional service, acting diligently in accordance with applicable technical and professional standards.
4. Confidentiality: Respecting the confidentiality of information acquired as a result of professional relationships, never disclosing it to third parties without proper specific authority unless there is a legal or professional duty to disclose.
5. Professional Behavior: Complying with relevant laws and regulations and avoiding any conduct that the auditor knows or should know might discredit the profession.

The COSO Internal Control Integrated Framework

Auditors evaluate internal controls to assess Control Risk:

[1. CONTROL ENVIRONMENT] (Tone at the top, ethical integrity, board oversight)
         |
         v
[2. RISK ASSESSMENT] (Identifying and analyzing operational & financial risks)
         |
         v
[3. CONTROL ACTIVITIES] (Policies, authorizations, physical segregations)
         |
         v
[4. INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION] (Timely recording & transmission of data)
         |
         v
[5. MONITORING ACTIVITIES] (Ongoing management review & internal audit)

The 5 Components:

1. Control Environment: Sets the organizational tone, reflecting management’s commitment to ethical values, competence, and board oversight.
2. Risk Assessment: The entity’s process for identifying, analyzing, and managing risks relevant to preparing financial statements.
3. Control Activities: Policies and procedures that help ensure management directives are carried out (segregation of duties, physical asset security, IT access passwords).
4. Information and Communication: Systems that identify, capture, and exchange operational and financial information.
5. Monitoring: Ongoing evaluations to ascertain whether internal controls are present and functioning.

Substantive Audit Procedures: Vouching vs. Verification

1. Vouching vs. Verification

• Vouching: Testing the authenticity and validity of recorded transactions by examining supporting documentary evidence (invoices, receipts, contracts), moving from financial journals back to source documents (testing existence/occurrence).
• Verification: Establishing the physical existence, legal ownership, valuation, freedom from encumbrance, and proper disclosure of assets and liabilities on the balance sheet date.

2. Verification Protocol for Inventory (Stock)

• Physical Attendance at Stocktake: Auditor observes physical inventory count at year-end, performing test counts and checking for damaged, obsolete, or slow-moving items.
• Cut-Off Testing: Inspecting receiving reports and shipping dockets immediately before and after year-end to ensure goods are recorded in the correct accounting period.
• Lower of Cost and Net Realizable Value (NRV): Verifying that inventory is valued at the lower of historical cost or current selling price less completion costs (NAS 2).

Auditor’s Rights, Duties, and Liabilities under Companies Act 2063

1. Statutory Rights

• Right of unhindered access at all times to all company books, accounts, vouchers, and records.
• Right to obtain necessary information, explanations, and officer disclosures.
• Right to attend all General Meetings of the company and receive all meeting notices.

2. Statutory Duties

• Make a formal audit report to the shareholders stating whether financial statements present a true and fair view.
• Report whether proper books of account have been kept, whether the balance sheet agrees with books, and whether any officer acted against company interest or committed fraud.

3. Legal Liabilities

• Civil Liability for Negligence: Liable to compensate the company or third parties for financial losses resulting from breach of duty or failure to exercise reasonable care.
• Criminal Liability for Fraud: Knowingly signing a false report carries fines and imprisonment up to two years.

Case Analysis: Statutory Audit Dilemma at Himalayan Wholesale Distributors Ltd.

a. Legal and Accounting Analysis of Irregularities

1. Premature Revenue Recognition (NFRS 15): Recognizing Rs 180M under a fabricated ‘Bill-and-Hold’ arrangement violates NFRS 15. Control has not transferred to the buyer; risks and rewards remain with the seller. Revenue and receivables are materially overstated.
2. Non-Provisioning of Bankrupt Debtor (NFRS 9): Failing to impair a Rs 45M receivable from a legally bankrupt debtor violates Expected Credit Loss (ECL) standards, overstating assets and profits by Rs 45M.
3. Illegal Director Loan (Companies Act 2063): Section 100 strictly prohibits companies from advancing loans to their own directors or family members, constituting criminal corporate misappropriation.
4. Management Scope Limitation (Rs 80M Inventory): Refusing physical inspection of 28% of total assets represents a severe, material management-imposed scope limitation.

---

b. Professional Response to Intimidation Threat (ICAN Code of Ethics)

• Intimidation Threat: Threats of contract termination are coercive pressures aimed at deterring the auditor from exercising professional skepticism.
• Auditor Response: The auditor must refuse to compromise integrity. Management cannot dictate audit conclusions. The auditor must escalate the matter in writing to the Audit Committee and Board of Directors.
• If management persists, the auditor must resign or issue a modified report, reporting fraud to regulatory authorities (Company Registrar’s Office).

---

c. Determination of Audit Opinion

• Pervasiveness and Materiality Assessment:
  • Combined financial misstatements (Rs 180M revenue + Rs 45M unprovisioned debt) exceed 25% of enterprise turnover.
  • The scope limitation (Rs 80M inventory) affects 28% of balance sheet assets.
• Conclusion: Misstatements and scope limitations are both Material and Pervasive, completely distorting the truth and fairness of financial statements.
• Opinion: Issue a DISCLAIMER OF OPINION (or ADVERSE OPINION on recognized misstatements combined with a disclaimer on inventory).

---

d. Draft Audit Report Excerpt: Basis for Disclaimer of Opinion

INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT To the Shareholders of Himalayan Wholesale Distributors Ltd.

Disclaimer of Opinion We were engaged to audit the financial statements of Himalayan Wholesale Distributors Ltd. We do not express an opinion on the accompanying financial statements. Because of the significance of the matters described in the Basis for Disclaimer of Opinion section of our report, we have not been able to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for an audit opinion.

Basis for Disclaimer of Opinion:

1. Scope Limitation on Inventory: Management did not permit us to physically inspect the Nepalgunj warehouse containing inventories stated at Rs 80,000,000 as of 31 Ashadh 2080. We were unable to perform alternative audit procedures to verify the existence and valuation of 28% of the company’s total assets.
2. Improper Revenue Recognition: The company recognized revenue of Rs 180,000,000 on invoiced goods where physical possession and operational control were not transferred to customers prior to year-end, violating NFRS 15. Consequently, Revenue, Trade Receivables, and Net Profit are materially overstated by Rs 180,000,000.
3. Unprovided Bad Debts: Trade Receivables include Rs 45,000,000 due from an insolvent debtor. Zero impairment provision was recognized, violating NFRS 9 and overstating net assets by Rs 45,000,000.
4. Illegal Director Advances: Advances include an unsecured loan of Rs 25,000,000 to the Managing Director, in direct violation of Section 100 of the Nepal Companies Act 2063.