Skip to content

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

Vistara Textiles Ltd, a listed company, has engaged CA Meera to provide a limited assurance report on its BRSR Core indicators. During planning, Meera finds that the greenhouse gas emission figures were computed by an external consultant engaged by management. What is the most appropriate action for Meera regarding this work?

Meera should evaluate the competence, capabilities and objectivity of management's expert and obtain sufficient appropriate evidence on whether the work is adequate. Using an expert does not remove the practitioner's responsibility for the conclusion, and blind reliance would not provide the evidence needed for assurance.

  1. ARely on the consultant's figures fully, since management has engaged an expert
  2. BEvaluate the competence, capabilities and objectivity of the consultant and obtain sufficient appropriate evidence on the work's adequacyCorrect
  3. CRefuse the engagement because emission data can only be assured by an environmental scientist
  4. DDisclose the consultant's name in the report as the party responsible for the opinion

Explanation

When information is prepared using a management's expert, the practitioner evaluates the expert's competence, capabilities and objectivity and assesses the appropriateness of the work as evidence. Full reliance ignores this duty. Refusing is unnecessary, and the practitioner cannot shift responsibility for the conclusion to the expert.

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.

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