Case Analysis and Response, Case Study Example

What conclusion would you draw if you were the in-charge auditor in this case?

Knowing that the documents presented are not properly verified, it is essential that the auditor find a way for the problem to be resolved. Signing into a non-verified documentation of financial reports is as evidently wrong as signing into a fraudulent set of records. Even though the boss or the higher supervisor would demand for the signing of a memo on the approval of the documents, it should always be the first choice to reveal only valid records.

What would you do if you were the audit partner?

Given that the situation calls for a decision, an audit partner should actually support the desire of the auditor to further investigate on the matter to make sure that the details of the report are reliable and valid. This would allow for the chance to clear the discrepancies from particular fraudulent activities that might have occurred in the company during the specific times of recorded data.

Would you issue an audit report based on the facts of this case? If so, what would that report be? If not, why not?

No. Based on ethical grounds, presenting a report that would be based from largely different values that have no grounds of proof would render the whole report unreliable thus would render the auditor’s judgment weak and fraudulent. 

What should the auditor have done in this case before the issue arose?

Carefully putting down the correct data and proving such report through proper investigation and presentation of proofs that would support their record would make it easier for the recording process to be factual and practically supportive of reality. It is only through this that the issue could be further controlled before it even arose.