Skip to content

CA Final · Advanced Auditing, Assurance and Professional Ethics · Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) & Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) Assurance

CA Rohan is engaged for reasonable assurance on a company's sustainability report. Management refuses to give him a written representation that it has fulfilled its responsibility for preparing the report using the stated criteria. What is the most appropriate conclusion by Rohan?

Rohan should treat the refusal as a limitation on scope and consider disclaiming a conclusion or withdrawing from the engagement. Management's written representation on its responsibility is essential evidence, and its refusal casts doubt on integrity, so an unmodified or adverse conclusion would not be appropriate.

  1. AProceed, since written representations are optional in assurance engagements
  2. BTreat the refusal as a scope limitation and consider disclaiming a conclusion or withdrawingCorrect
  3. CIssue an adverse conclusion because the criteria were not applied
  4. DIssue an unmodified conclusion with an emphasis of matter paragraph on the refusal

Explanation

Refusal to provide required written representations on management's responsibility raises doubts about integrity and limits evidence. The practitioner should consider disclaiming a conclusion or withdrawing. An adverse conclusion applies to misstatement, not lack of evidence, and an emphasis paragraph cannot cure a scope limitation.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) & Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) Assurance shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) & Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) AssuranceFree diagnostic mock

More Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) & Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) Assurance questions