Auditing Assignment - Desklib

Running head: AUDITING ASSIGNMENT
Auditing Assignment
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author’s Note

1AUDITING ASSIGNMENT
Table of Contents
Answer to Question 1a.........................................................................................................2
Answer to Question 1b........................................................................................................2
Answer to Question 1c.........................................................................................................3
Answer to Question 1d........................................................................................................3
Answer to Question 1e.........................................................................................................4
Answer to Question 1f.........................................................................................................5
Answer to Question 2a.........................................................................................................5
Answer to Question 2b........................................................................................................6
Answer to Question 2c.........................................................................................................7
Answer to Question 2d........................................................................................................7
References............................................................................................................................9

2AUDITING ASSIGNMENT
Answer to Question 1a
The given situation needs to be considered with accordance to APES 110. The relevant
section under this procedure can be inferred with the application of “Part B – Members In
Public Practice”. The discourse of this section informs the client for any incidence of
commission or referral fees received from the client. In the given case, elevated Alfred Jarmon
frequently insisted the clients for taking services from Computer Service Ltd. However, the
ethical breach can be identified when the company agreed to pay a commission of 10% for
referral leads. This ultra vires “Section 210 Professional Appointment”. The aforementioned
section has obligated the members in public practice for approval of engagement in professional
appointment. A comparable nature of breach may be further considered with “CPA Australia’s
Client Relationship Guide”. The violation of code of ethics needs to be further inferred with
“Section 280 Objectivity – All Services”. As per this section in the professional services
provided in regard to public practice may involve threat of compliance. For example, as for the
given case threat of objectivity can be referred with providing commission for referral to Alfred
Jarmon which is unethical (Louwers et al. 2015).
Answer to Question 1b
The given issue needs to be resolved as per fundamental principle of confidentiality. This
principle has agreed that in order to maintain confidentiality of any information any professional
body should not disclose any information to the third parties. Moreover, the sharing of
information is forbidden without prior approval of responsible authority unless a legal guide is
involved for the disclosure of any such information leading to personal gain for the members of
the third parties. The given case study identifies that Wrench and company has permitted its
client or third-party members for using the computer for their personal use. The company has

3AUDITING ASSIGNMENT
also allowed the relevant personnel from audit team to assist input of data. The ethical risk can
be clearly referred to “Section 350 Inducements”. This section prevents the members of any
business to influence decision-making for the purpose of gathering confidential information.
Therefore, in this case the third-party members may influence the auditors to obtain valuable
information of the company which may lead to reduced sales. The following incident ultra vires
“Section 220 Conflicts of Interest” as the members may manipulate confidential information of
the company for their personal gain (Hay, Stewart and Botica Redmayne 2017).
Answer to Question 1c
The application of APES 110 is seen to be relevant with “Part C – Members in
Business”. The following section infers that even in case members in a business are employed in
not for profit sector there is possibility of violation in fundamental ethical code of conduct. The
aforementioned section evaluates the different types of threats which may be faced for
safeguarding regulation, legislation and work environment. The given discourse shows that
Katrina Ng is holding the post of manager in a not for profit entity. At the same time, she is also
a member of board of directors. This prevents her from having an acting role in management
capacity of not for profit entity. This can be related with the breach of “Part C – Members in
Business”. The appropriate treatment for such incidence should be accounted with considering
her role in not for profit entity. In the given case she may also need to seek for legal advice in
any instance of unethical behaviour. Due to the nature of application of such a section of ethical
conduct she may also take the decision of resigning from the employing organisation (Carson,
Fargher and Zhang 2016).