Satyam Computer Services Essay

At the begining of 2009 the chairman of Satyam Computer Services accepted publicly to a fraud occurring in the firm.

Satyam reported in the monetary statements huge amounts of dollars in profits and cash possessions that never existed. The public auditor’s responsible for auditing the monetary statements of Satyam Laptop Services at that time was PW India, an internet affiliate of Pricewaterhouse Coopers. The Securities and Exchange Percentage determined that Satyam could commit the financial assertion fraud due to the negligence of the audit group.

The audit team tasked with auditing the data of Satyam failed to verify cash bills in bank details which were largely over displayed. Later it had been determined the more than one billion dollars Satyam claimed to acquire was actually a maximum of sixty-six , 000, 000. During the audits of Satyam Computer Services, the audit team by PW India never sought confirmations intended for the cash bills that managing asserted the clear infringement of auditing standards. The SEC, during the investigation, established that many examine teams in PW India accepted money confirmations straight from the supervision of their consumers and almost by no means questioned the reliability from the confirmations received.

It was as well revealed that occasionally the financial institutions would send out statements directly to the auditors even though they weren’t given to do so. Even though the bank statements showed distinct balances then those directed at the auditors by management, the examine team under no circumstances questioned the differences in quantity. Procedures, pertaining to reviewing audits, were put into place to assure that most audits will be completed with the best degree of professional care. The Satyam review team was warned with a partner coming from a different Pricewaterhouse Coopers company that their very own cash affirmation procedures were deficient, but nothing was done to correct the deficiency.

Because of this deficiency the Satyam scams was not exposed. As a result Satyam Computer Providers was fined 10 , 000, 000 dollars by SEC to get fraud and PW India was fined 7. mil dollars by SEC and PCAOB. The critical issue in this case is that PWC India did not take action in accordance with PCAOB or AICPA standards and codes of professional carry out.

The crucial factors will be as follows: * The auditors did not take action with credited professional proper care. * The auditors did not appropriately assess the risks of material misstatements. 5. The taxation team would not exercise professional skepticism. 5. The auditors did not take action with ethics or ideal of the users of the financial statements.

Credited professional attention, as needed by the PCAOB, require the auditors to keep up professional understanding and skill at the level required to make certain that clients acquire competent professional service and act according to professional specifications. This is the most vital part of the review process to make certain that the examine will be handled with, in the end, the users of the financial transactions best interest in mind. PWC India, in their taxation of Satyam, had entirely disregarded this fundamental dependence on auditors. By simply relying on the confirmations directed at them by management, the auditors would not provide the users of the monetary statements together with the skill and professionalism they are trusted with.

As a result, they will completely overlooked an obvious scam taking place in Satyam and if the executive of Satyam hadn’t accepted to the scam PWC India’s controls might have never trapped the overstatement. Another relevant issue this is that the taxation team would not appropriately measure the risks of material misstatements which usually resulted in the fraud. Ahead of an examine, in the preparing stage, the audit staff should have recognized accounts, transactions, and disclosures that could affect the financial assertions significantly if they were materially misstated.

The auditors in PWC India did not properly identify that the risk that the dire of supervision about the money accounts will result in a high-risk of material misstatement. Cash accounts regardless of sector should demand a special attention during an taxation. The professional judgment from the auditors was lacking in the audit of Satyam’s money balances. The moment evaluating the risks of specific accounts the auditors should have asked themselves whether there exists a risk of scams, whether there may be subjectivity in measuring the financial data, and if there is virtually any unusual bills in the accounts.

The answer to questions should have all been yes in this instance and there is no reason why they will shouldn’t have got properly verified the cash bills. One of the many requirements of an auditor is to workout professional skepticism. The auditor must consider what’s provided to him with a ‘grain of salt’ and also question and confirm the presence, occurrence, and accuracy of account amounts. In the review of Satyam, the auditors acted without professional skepticism whatsoever.

If the auditors are generally not doing their very own due diligence, the audit risk will go up due to the increase in detection risk. Management had taken advantage of the fact that the auditors procedures of detecting materials misstatements were lacking. This kind of article’s significance to the auditing profession is definitely enormous. From here, auditors should certainly learn to not take anything without any consideration and to constantly question what is put in entrance of you, unless it really is from a totally objective supply.

The auditors at PWC India would not follow the fundamental requirements associated with an audit proposal which led to a major fraud. Even when the banks delivered account caractere directly to the auditors, irrespective of not being expected to do so, the auditors even now did not query the mistakes. The gross negligence in such a case should be an illustration to all auditors; do not consider anything without any consideration. The quality control review also failed in this case. Auditors need to heed the advice from the review team.

Here, the audit team ignored the recommendations with the review staff to confirm funds balances together with the banks. Top quality control opinions are very significant to an proposal and auditors should not take recommendations with out due account.

Related essay