<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (5) TMI 140 - NATIONAL FINANCIAL REPORTING AUTHORITY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752087</link>
    <description>An auditor of a listed public interest entity must obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence, assess and document key audit risks, and modify the audit opinion where material misstatements exist. The order found that the auditors failed to treat the non-recognition of liabilities after loans became non-performing assets as a material misstatement, improperly using emphasis of matter instead of modifying the opinion. It also found inadequate audit work and documentation on going concern, revenue recognition, inventory, trade receivables, materiality, engagement quality control review, and communications with those charged with governance. The audit firm was held independently responsible for quality control lapses, and statutory penalties were imposed on both the firm and the engagement partner, with debarment ordered against the engagement partner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 08:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=751822" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 140 - NATIONAL FINANCIAL REPORTING AUTHORITY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752087</link>
      <description>An auditor of a listed public interest entity must obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence, assess and document key audit risks, and modify the audit opinion where material misstatements exist. The order found that the auditors failed to treat the non-recognition of liabilities after loans became non-performing assets as a material misstatement, improperly using emphasis of matter instead of modifying the opinion. It also found inadequate audit work and documentation on going concern, revenue recognition, inventory, trade receivables, materiality, engagement quality control review, and communications with those charged with governance. The audit firm was held independently responsible for quality control lapses, and statutory penalties were imposed on both the firm and the engagement partner, with debarment ordered against the engagement partner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752087</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>