AUDITING

THE AUDITORS RESPONSIBILITY TO CONSIDER FRAUD

IN AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (BSA-240)

Lecture # 6
Understanding about Fraud & Error:
Misstatements in the financial statements can arise from fraud or error. The distinguishing factor
between fraud and error is whether the underlying action that results in the misstatement of the
financial statements is intentional or unintentional.
The term error refers to an unintentional misstatement in financial statements, including the
omission of an amount or a disclosure, such as the following:

A mistake in gathering or processing data from which financial statements are prepared.
An incorrect accounting estimate arising from oversight or misinterpretation of facts.
A mistake in the application of accounting principles relating to measurement, recognition,
classification, presentation or disclosure.

The term fraud refers to an intentional act by one or more individuals among management, those
charged with governance, employees, or third parties, involving the use of deception to obtain an
unjust or illegal advantage.
Responsibilities of Those Charged with Governance and of Management
It is the responsibility of management, with oversight from those charged with governance, to
establish a control environment and maintain policies and procedures to assist in achieving the
objective of ensuring, as far as possible, the orderly and efficient conduct of the entitys business.
This responsibility includes establishing and maintaining controls pertaining to the entitys
objective of preparing financial statements that give a true and fair view (or are presented fairly in
all material respects) in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework and
managing risks that may give rise to material misstatements in those financial statements.
As part of this consideration, management may conclude that it is not cost effective to implement
and maintain a particular control in relation to the reduction in the risks of material misstatement
due to fraud to be achieved.
Inherent Limitations of an Audit in the Context of Fraud
The objective of an audit of financial statements is to enable the auditor to express an opinion
whether the financial statements are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with an
applicable financial reporting framework. Owing to the inherent limitations of an audit, there is an
unavoidable risk that some material misstatements of the financial statements will not be detected,
even though the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with ISAs.
The subsequent discovery of a material misstatement of the financial statements resulting from
fraud does not, in and of itself, indicate a failure to comply with ISAs.
Responsibilities of the Auditor for Detecting Material Misstatement Due to Fraud
An auditor obtains reasonable assurance that the financial statements taken as a whole are free from
material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error. An auditor cannot obtain absolute
assurance that material misstatements in the financial statements will be detected because of such
factors as the use of judgment, the use of testing, the inherent limitations of internal control and the
Md. Mokhlesur Rahman Mozid, ACMA

fact that much of the audit evidence available to the auditor is persuasive rather than conclusive in
nature.
When obtaining reasonable assurance, an auditor maintains an attitude of professional skepticism
throughout the audit considers the potential for management override of controls and recognizes the
fact that audit procedures that are effective for detecting error may not be appropriate in the context
of an identified risk of material misstatement due to fraud.
Professional Skepticism
Professional skepticism is an attitude that includes a questioning mind and a critical assessment of
audit evidence. Professional skepticism requires an ongoing questioning of whether the information
and audit evidence obtained suggests that a material misstatement due to fraud may exist.
The auditor should maintain an attitude of professional skepticism throughout the audit,
recognizing the possibility that a material misstatement due to fraud could exist, notwithstanding
the auditors past experience with the entity about the honesty and integrity of management and
those charged with governance.
Discussion among the Engagement Team
The engagement team should discuss the susceptibility of the entity to material misstatement of the
financial statements due to fraud. The discussion includes the engagement partner who uses
professional judgment, prior experience with the entity and knowledge of current developments to
determine which other members of the engagement team are included in the discussion.
Risk Assessment Procedures
The auditor performs the following procedures to obtain information that is used to identify the
risks of material misstatement due to fraud:

Makes inquiries of management, of those charged with governance, and of others within the
entity as appropriate and obtains an understanding of how those charged with governance
exercise oversight of managements processes for identifying and responding to the risks of
fraud and the internal control that management has established to mitigate these risks.
Considers whether one or more fraud risk factors are present.
Considers any unusual or unexpected relationships that have been identified in performing
analytical procedures.
Considers other information that may be helpful in identifying the risks of material
misstatement due to fraud.

When obtaining an understanding of the entity and its environment, including its internal control,
the auditor should make inquiries of management regarding:

Managements assessment of the risk that the financial statements may be materially
misstated due to fraud;
Managements process for identifying and responding to the risks of fraud in the entity,
including any specific risks of fraud that management has identified or account balances,
classes of transactions or disclosures for which a risk of fraud is likely to exist;
Managements communication, if any, to those charged with governance regarding its
processes for identifying and responding to the risks of fraud in the entity; and
Managements communication, if any, to employees regarding its views on business
practices and ethical behavior.
Md. Mokhlesur Rahman Mozid, ACMA

Identification and Assessment of the Risks of Material Misstatement Due to Fraud

When identifying and assessing the risks of material misstatement at the financial statement level,
and at the assertion level for classes of transactions, account balances and disclosures, the auditor
should identify and assess the risks of material misstatement due to fraud. Those assessed risks that
could result in a material misstatement due to fraud are significant risks and accordingly, to the
extent not already done so, the auditor should evaluate the design of the entitys related controls,
including relevant control activities, and determine whether they have been implemented.
To assess the risks of material misstatement due to fraud the auditor uses professional judgment
and:
Identifies risks of fraud by considering the information obtained through performing risk
assessment procedures and by considering the classes of transactions, account balances and
disclosures in the financial statements;
Relates the identified risks of fraud to what can go wrong at the assertion level; and
Considers the likely magnitude of the potential misstatement including the possibility that
the risk might give rise to multiple misstatements and the likelihood of the risk occurring.
Audit Procedures Responsive to Management Override of Controls
To respond to the risk of management override of controls, the auditor should design and perform
audit procedures to:
Test the appropriateness of journal entries recorded in the general ledger and other
adjustments made in the preparation of financial statements;
Review accounting estimates for biases that could result in material misstatement due to
fraud; and
Obtain an understanding of the business rationale of significant transactions that the auditor
becomes aware of that are outside of the normal course of business for the entity, or that
otherwise appear to be unusual given the auditors understanding of the entity and its
environment.
Evaluation of Audit Evidence
As per ISA 330, the auditor, based on the audit procedures performed and the audit evidence
obtained, evaluates whether the assessments of the risks of material misstatement at the assertion
level remain appropriate. This evaluation is primarily a qualitative matter based on the auditors
judgment. Such an evaluation may provide further insight about the risks of material misstatement
due to fraud and whether there is a need to perform additional or different audit procedures.
Management Representations
The auditor should obtain written representations from management that:
It acknowledges its responsibility for the design and implementation of internal control to
prevent and detect fraud;
It has disclosed to the auditor the results of its assessment of the risk that the financial
statements may be materially misstated as a result of fraud;
It has disclosed to the auditor its knowledge of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the entity
involving: Management, Employees who have significant roles in internal control; or others
where the fraud could have a material effect on the financial statements; and
It has disclosed to the auditor its knowledge of any allegations of fraud, or suspected fraud,
affecting the entitys financial statements communicated by employees, former employees,
analysts, regulators or others.

Md. Mokhlesur Rahman Mozid, ACMA