105 paragraphs found
In certain circumstances, audit evidence obtained from previous audits may provide audit evidence where the auditor performs audit procedures to establish its continuing relevance. For example, in performing a previous audit, the auditor may have …
Changes may affect the relevance of the audit evidence obtained in previous audits such that there may no longer be a basis for continued reliance. For example, changes in a system that enable an entity to receive a new report from the system probably do …
The auditor’s decision on whether to rely on audit evidence obtained in previous audits for controls that: have not changed since they were last tested; and are not controls that mitigate a significant risk, is a matter of professional judgement. In …
In general, the higher the risk of material misstatement, or the greater the reliance on controls, the shorter the time period elapsed, if any, is likely to be. Factors that may decrease the period for retesting a control, or result in not relying on …
When there are a number of controls for which the auditor intends to rely on audit evidence obtained in previous audits, testing some of those controls in each audit provides corroborating information about the continuing effectiveness of the control …
A material misstatement detected by the auditor’s procedures is a strong indicator of the existence of a significant deficiency in internal …
The concept of effectiveness of the operation of controls recognises that some deviations in the way controls are applied by the entity may occur. Deviations from prescribed controls may be caused by such factors as changes in key personnel, significant …
Paragraph 18 requires the auditor to design and perform substantive procedures for each material class of transactions, account balance, and disclosure, irrespective of the assessed risks of material misstatement. This requirement reflects the facts …
Depending on the circumstances, the auditor may determine that: Performing only substantive analytical procedures will be sufficient to reduce audit risk to an acceptably low level. For example, where the auditor’s assessment of risk is supported by …
Substantive analytical procedures are generally more applicable to large volumes of transactions that tend to be predictable over time. ASA 520 [5] establishes requirements and provides guidance on the application of analytical procedures during an …