Role of
Audit Evidence under SA 500 (Audit Evidence) Issued by ICAI in the Work of a
Financial Auditor
Audit evidence
lies at the heart of the auditor’s responsibility to express an independent
opinion on financial statements. SA 500, issued by the Institute of Chartered
Accountants of India (ICAI), establishes the core principles that guide
auditors in identifying, obtaining and evaluating evidence that is sufficient
and appropriate to support their conclusions. The Standard does not prescribe
fixed procedures; rather, it provides a conceptual foundation within which
auditors exercise professional judgment and scepticism.
A key feature
of the Standard is the distinction between the sufficiency and appropriateness
of audit evidence. Sufficiency relates to the quantity of evidence, which
varies depending on the risk of material misstatement and the quality of
evidence obtained. Appropriateness refers to the quality of evidence in terms
of its relevance and reliability. SA 500 recognises that evidence obtained from
external sources is generally more reliable than internally generated
information, and that evidence obtained directly by the auditor—through
observation or inspection—tends to carry greater weight than evidence obtained
indirectly.
1. Objective
and Scope of SA 500 (Key Clauses)
SA 500 sets out
the fundamental obligation of the auditor:
Clause 4 —
Objective of the Auditor
The objective
is to design and perform audit procedures that enable the auditor to obtain
sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to draw reasonable conclusions on
which the audit opinion is based.
Clause 5 —
Meaning of Audit Evidence
Audit evidence
comprises information used by the auditor in arriving at conclusions. It
includes both information contained in the accounting records and information
from other sources.
Clause 6 —
Sufficiency and Appropriateness
Sufficiency relates to the
quantity of evidence.
Appropriateness relates to the
quality of evidence—its relevance and reliability.
Evidence
obtained directly by the auditor is generally more reliable than evidence
obtained indirectly.
Clause 7 —
Inconsistency and Doubtful Reliability
If evidence is
inconsistent or doubtful, the auditor must determine its effect on other audit
evidence and the audit report.
Clause 8 —
Information from Management Specialists
The auditor
must evaluate the competence, capabilities and objectivity of specialists whose
work is used as audit evidence.
Clause 9 —
Information Produced by the Entity
Where a report
or data is generated internally, the auditor must determine whether it is
reliable for testing and corroboration.
Clause 10 — Use
of Management Representations
Management
representations alone do not constitute sufficient and appropriate audit
evidence.
Clause 11 —
Audit Evidence in Electronic Form
The auditor
must consider the reliability of electronically stored or transmitted
information in the context of the IT environment and related controls.
2. Role of
Audit Evidence for the Financial Auditor
Audit evidence
enables the auditor to form a well-grounded opinion on whether financial
statements present a true and fair view. Its role extends to several critical
dimensions:
a) Basis for
Evaluating Assertions
Financial
statements are built upon management’s assertions—existence, completeness,
valuation, accuracy, rights and obligations, and presentation. Evidence directs
the auditor to validate these assertions through appropriate procedures.
b) Foundation
for Assessing Risk
Audit evidence
informs the auditor’s understanding of the entity’s environment and internal
controls, thereby influencing the assessment of the risk of material
misstatement.
c) Support for
Professional Judgement
SA 500
emphasises that auditors operate with persuasive, not absolute, evidence. The
role of audit evidence is to provide a reasonable basis for judgment in
circumstances where certainty is neither required nor practical.
d) Ensuring
Audit Quality and Credibility
The sufficiency
and appropriateness of evidence directly affect the credibility of the
auditor’s opinion. Reliable, relevant, and well-documented evidence enhances
public confidence in the financial reporting process.
e) Defence in
Regulatory and Peer Reviews
Properly
obtained and documented evidence serves as the auditor’s defence in
disciplinary proceedings, litigation, or quality reviews. It demonstrates due
diligence and compliance with professional standards.
3. Types of
Audit Evidence Recognised under SA 500
SA 500 does not
restrict evidence to documents alone. It recognises a broad array of evidential
matter, including:
1. Inspection of Records or Documents
• Invoices, contracts, bank statements, ledgers,
electronic logs.
2. Inspection of Tangible Assets
Physical
verification of inventory, fixed assets, cash on hand.
3. Observation
Watching a
process, such as stock count or cash tally, being performed.
4. External Confirmations
Direct
confirmations from banks, debtors, creditors, legal counsel, and others.
5. Recalculation
Checking mathematical accuracy,
recomputing depreciation, interest, etc.
6. Reperformance
Independently performing a
control or procedure that was originally conducted by management.
7. Analytical Procedures
Ratio analysis,
trend analysis, comparison with budgets, industry benchmarks.
8. Inquiry
Oral or written
inquiries with management, operational staff, or third parties.
9. Electronic and Digital Evidence
System logs,
digital audit trails, ERP-generated reports, electronic invoices.
10. Work of Management Experts or Auditor’s Experts
Valuation
reports, actuarial computations, technical analysis, real estate valuations.
11. Management Representations
Representations
for matters where other evidence is insufficient, though not a substitute for
substantive audit procedures.
4.
Reliability Hierarchy of Audit Evidence
SA 500
implicitly recognises a hierarchy of reliability:
Evidence from
independent external sources is generally the most reliable.
Evidence
obtained directly by the auditor carries more weight than information obtained
indirectly.
It Documentary
evidence tends to be more reliable than oral explanations.
Internally
generated evidence is reliable only when internal controls are strong.
This hierarchy
guides the auditor in assessing the nature and extent of procedures required to
obtain assurance.
5.
Conclusion:-SA 500 underscores that the financial auditor’s opinion must
rest on a foundation of credible, relevant, and sufficient audit evidence. In
an environment where business models are increasingly digital and risks more
sophisticated, the role of audit evidence assumes even greater importance. The
Standard equips auditors with a structured yet flexible framework to exercise
judgment, maintain scepticism, and uphold the integrity of the audit process.
Proper application of SA 500 not only enhances audit quality but also
reinforces public trust in financial reporting and the broader corporate
governance ecosystem.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment