CA Final · Integrated Business Solutions (Multidisciplinary Case Study with Strategic Management) · Advanced Auditing, Assurance and Professional Ethics
Case: Meghna Steels Ltd has Rs 80 crore turnover. The auditor, CA Iyer, determined overall materiality of Rs 80 lakh (1% of turnover) and performance materiality at 75% of it. While testing, the auditor found uncorrected misstatements in individual items of Rs 6 lakh, Rs 9 lakh and Rs 5 lakh, all clearly trivial threshold being Rs 4 lakh. Management refuses to correct any of them. What is the correct approach under SA 450 and SA 320? Which statement correctly reflects the performance materiality and the evaluation of these misstatements?
Performance materiality is 75 percent of Rs 80 lakh, that is Rs 60 lakh. The auditor must accumulate all misstatements above the clearly trivial threshold, here Rs 20 lakh in total, evaluate their combined effect on the opinion, and communicate uncorrected ones to those charged with governance.
- APerformance materiality is Rs 60 lakh; the auditor accumulates the misstatements above the Rs 4 lakh threshold (Rs 20 lakh) and evaluates their effect on the financial statements and audit opinionCorrect
- BPerformance materiality is Rs 20 lakh; the misstatements are ignored as they are individually below overall materiality
- CPerformance materiality is Rs 80 lakh; the misstatements need not be communicated to those charged with governance
- DPerformance materiality is Rs 1.05 crore; the misstatements are cleared automatically
Explanation
Performance materiality is 75% x 80 lakh = Rs 60 lakh. Misstatements above the clearly trivial threshold (6+9+5 = Rs 20 lakh) are accumulated and evaluated, and uncorrected ones are communicated to those charged with governance. Ignoring them because each is below overall materiality ignores aggregation.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Advanced Auditing, Assurance and Professional Ethics shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Advanced Auditing, Assurance and Professional Ethics questions
- Case: Kaveri Agro Foods Ltd, a listed company, is audited by CA Rohan. During the audit, Rohan finds that the company's finance head has ask…
- Case: Nandini Textiles Ltd is a subsidiary of Sagar Industries Ltd, whose consolidated financial statements are audited by M/s Iyer & Associ…
- Case: Kaveri Agro Foods Ltd, a listed company, has its statutory audit conducted by M/s Rao & Co. During planning, the engagement partner le…
- Case: Gopal Steel Ltd's board has engaged CA Firm Tara & Associates for statutory audit. The partner, CA Tara, also wants to provide interna…
- Case: Kaveri Agro Foods Ltd, a listed company, has appointed M/s Rao & Co. as statutory auditors. During the audit of FY 2024-25, the audito…
- Case: Kaveri Agro Foods Ltd, a listed company, has appointed M/s Rao & Co as statutory auditor. During the year, the company's inventory of …