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

During a limited assurance engagement on Sagar Ports Ltd's BRSR disclosures, CA Neel finds that the reported 'renewable energy share 38%' is derived from a third-party vendor's certificate. The vendor's methodology is unclear, and the vendor refuses access. Management says the certificate is sufficient. Which action is best?

He should evaluate the vendor's competence, objectivity and data reliability. If access is refused and sufficient appropriate evidence cannot be obtained, this is a limitation of scope, so he should modify the conclusion or disclaim it, rather than accept the certificate blindly or simply blame the vendor in the report.

1. AAccept the certificate since it comes from an external party, which is always reliable
2. BEvaluate the vendor's competence and objectivity and the reliability of the data; if the lack of access prevents sufficient appropriate evidence, consider the effect on his conclusion, up to a modified conclusion or disclaimerCorrect
3. CDisclaim responsibility in the report by saying the figure is the vendor's, while still giving an unmodified conclusion
4. DReport the matter to SEBI immediately without informing management