Skip to content

Compliance Management, Audit and Due Diligence · Peer Review and Quality Review

Peer Review Board and Peer Reviewer Eligibility

Updated 11 October 2026 · Fact-checked

The Peer Review Board is the body of the Institute that oversees the peer review of practising company secretaries. A peer reviewer must be technically qualified, experienced and objective. You answer by naming the requirement, applying it to the facts, and concluding whether the reviewer is eligible.

Understand Peer Review Board and Peer Reviewer Eligibility

Peer review means one professional checks whether another professional's practice follows the required standards. The idea is simple. A review is only worth something if the reviewer is competent and has no stake in the result. So every eligibility rule tests two things: competence and objectivity.

The Peer Review Board is the Institute's body that oversees the peer review system. In broad terms it frames the review process, maintains the list of reviewers, assigns reviews and considers review reports. The exact composition, number of members and empanelment conditions are set by the Institute's Peer Review Guidelines. Check the latest version before the exam. Do not rely on memory for numbers or years of experience.

The official text supplied for this page is SQC 1, the ICAI standard on quality control. It deals with the engagement quality control reviewer, who is a different role from a peer reviewer. But the eligibility logic is the same, so you can use it to reason through case questions. The firm's policies must set out the reviewer's technical qualifications, including experience and authority, and the degree to which the reviewer can be consulted without losing objectivity.

SQC 1 gives the objectivity test in clear terms. The reviewer is not selected by the engagement partner, does not otherwise take part in the engagement during the review period, does not make decisions for the engagement team, and is not subject to other considerations that threaten objectivity. The same logic is why a peer reviewer should not be someone connected with the practice being reviewed.

SQC 1 also covers small practices. Sole practitioners or small firms can contract suitably qualified external persons for quality control reviews. They must then follow the same eligibility and objectivity requirements.

Key rules to remember

Two-part eligibility test
Eligible reviewer = technical qualification (expertise, experience, authority) + objectivity
SQC 1 para 68 requires the firm's policies to establish eligibility through both limbs. Use this as the frame for every answer.
Listed entity reviewer
Reviewer for a listed entity audit = experience and authority to act as audit engagement partner on listed entity audits
SQC 1 para 69. What is sufficient otherwise depends on the circumstances of the engagement.
Objectivity safeguards
Not selected by engagement partner + no participation in the engagement + no decisions for the team + no other threats
SQC 1 para 70, (a) to (d). Learn all four in order.
Consultation rule
Consultation allowed; if significant, protect objectivity or replace the reviewer
SQC 1 para 71. Consulting the reviewer need not disqualify them, unless it becomes significant and objectivity cannot be kept.
Timing and unresolved differences
Review at appropriate stages before the report is issued; no report until differences are resolved
SQC 1 paras 66 and 67. Differences are resolved by the firm's own procedures.
Documentation
Procedures performed + review completed before report + no unresolved significant matters
SQC 1 para 73, (a) to (c).
Retention of documentation
Minimum retention of engagement documentation = 7 years
SQC 1 modifies ISQC 1's five years, because the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 and its regulations prescribe seven years.

How to solve Peer Review Board and Peer Reviewer Eligibility questions

Use this method for any question on who can be a reviewer, or on how the Board and reviewers are connected.

  1. 1Identify the role in the question: Peer Review Board, peer reviewer, or engagement quality control reviewer under SQC 1.
  2. 2State the rule in plain words: reviewer needs technical qualification, experience and objectivity.
  3. 3List the facts that bear on competence: membership status, practice experience, authority, listed entity work.
  4. 4List the facts that bear on objectivity: who selected the reviewer, any involvement in the engagement, any decision-making for the team, any other threat.
  5. 5Apply the rule to each fact. Say clearly which facts help and which hurt.
  6. 6Conclude: eligible, not eligible, or eligible only after a safeguard or replacement.
  7. 7Add the practical point: documentation, timing before the report, and escalation under the firm's procedures for differences.
  8. 8For Board questions, state its oversight role and say the exact composition and conditions follow the Institute's current Peer Review Guidelines.

Quickest way: Competence-Objectivity check

When to use it: Use it for short case questions where you must decide quickly whether a person can act as reviewer.

  1. Write C and O on your page.
  2. Under C, tick expertise, experience and authority, and note the listed entity rule if relevant.
  3. Under O, check the four safeguards: not picked by partner, no participation, no decisions, no other threat.
  4. If any O item fails, the person is not eligible unless the threat is removed or someone else is appointed.
  5. Write the conclusion in one line and cite the standard's wording.

Common mistakes in Peer Review Board and Peer Reviewer Eligibility

  • Treating the engagement quality control reviewer and the peer reviewer as the same person.

    Both words contain review, and both rest on objectivity.

    Fix: Say the SQC 1 reviewer works inside a firm on a specific engagement before the report. A peer reviewer reviews the practice under the Institute's scheme. Use SQC 1 only for the shared principles.

  • Writing exact experience years or Board strength from memory.

    Students memorise numbers from older notes.

    Fix: State the principle, and say the specific conditions are as in the Institute's current Peer Review Guidelines. A wrong number loses marks.

  • Saying a reviewer who was consulted is always disqualified.

    Over-reading the objectivity rule.

    Fix: Para 71 says consultation need not compromise eligibility. It becomes a problem only when it is significant and objectivity cannot be maintained.

  • Ignoring who selected the reviewer.

    Students focus only on qualifications.

    Fix: Always check para 70(a): the reviewer is not selected by the engagement partner.

  • Forgetting the timing rule.

    Review is imagined as a post-mortem.

    Fix: Say the review happens at appropriate stages and is finished before the report is issued.

  • Giving a conclusion without applying the facts.

    Students recall the rule and stop.

    Fix: Follow provision, analysis, conclusion. Quote each fact before you judge it.

Worked examples

Example 1

CS Meera Iyer, a practising company secretary, is asked to review a listed company audit engagement. The engagement partner, CS Arvind Rao, personally picked her. She has not worked on the engagement. She has experience of acting as engagement partner on listed entity audits. Is she eligible as the engagement quality control reviewer under SQC 1?

Show the solution
  1. Rule: eligibility needs technical qualification and objectivity (para 68).
  2. Competence: for a listed entity, the reviewer needs experience and authority to act as audit engagement partner on listed entity audits (para 69). Meera has this.
  3. Objectivity: para 70(a) says the reviewer is not selected by the engagement partner. Arvind selected her, so this safeguard fails.
  4. Her non-participation satisfies para 70(b), but one failed safeguard is enough to affect objectivity.
  5. Conclusion: she is competent but not properly eligible. The firm should appoint the reviewer through its own policies, not by the engagement partner's choice.

Answer: Meera has the required competence, but she fails the objectivity test because the engagement partner selected her. She should not act unless the firm appoints her through its own process.

Example 2

During an engagement, the engagement partner often consults the reviewer, and the consultations have become significant. The firm wants to know what should be done under SQC 1.

Show the solution
  1. Rule: the partner may consult the reviewer, and this need not compromise eligibility (para 71).
  2. Where consultation becomes significant, both the team and the reviewer must take care to maintain objectivity.
  3. If objectivity cannot be maintained, another individual in the firm or a suitably qualified external person is appointed as either the reviewer or the person to be consulted.
  4. The firm's policies must also allow replacement of the reviewer where the ability to review objectively may be impaired.
  5. Conclusion: do not disqualify automatically. First try to preserve objectivity, and if that fails, replace one of the two roles.

Answer: Significant consultation does not itself disqualify the reviewer. If objectivity cannot be preserved, the firm appoints another individual or a suitably qualified external person as reviewer or as the consulted person.

Exam tips

  • Always name both limbs, competence and objectivity, even if the question stresses only one.
  • Use the exact wording of the four objectivity safeguards when the facts mention who selected the reviewer.
  • Do not quote numbers for Board strength or experience unless you are sure. Refer to the Institute's current Peer Review Guidelines.
  • In case questions, structure the answer as rule, analysis of facts, conclusion, and add one practical compliance point such as documentation before the report.
  • If a question mentions small firms or sole practitioners, mention that suitably qualified external persons may be contracted.

Practice questions from Peer Review and Quality Review

Peer Review Board and Peer Reviewer Eligibility in other exams

The same ground in other exams, if you are preparing for more than one or want another angle on it.

Peer Review Board and Peer Reviewer Eligibility: frequently asked questions

What does the Peer Review Board do?

It is the Institute's body that oversees the peer review system for practising company secretaries. Its detailed composition and functions are set out in the Institute's Peer Review Guidelines, so read the latest version.

Who can be a peer reviewer?

A person with the required technical qualification and experience, who is also objective and free from threats to independence. The exact qualification and empanelment conditions are in the Institute's current guidelines.

Can a reviewer be consulted by the engagement team?

Yes. Under SQC 1, consultation need not compromise the reviewer's eligibility. If it becomes significant and objectivity cannot be kept, another individual is appointed to take over one of the two roles.

Is SQC 1 part of the ICSI peer review rules?

No. SQC 1 is an ICAI standard on quality control. It is useful for the shared ideas of competence and objectivity, but use the Institute's guidelines for company secretary peer review specifics.