← Back to Explorer
S.R. Batliboi & Co. LLP
India · Ernst & Young Global Limited · Triennially Inspected
- Inspection year
- 2024
- Report date
- 25-Sep-2025
- PCAOB release
- 104-2025-154
- Audits reviewed
- 3
- Audits w/ Part I.A deficiencies
- 3
- Part I.A deficiency rate
- 100%
- Part I.A deficiencies
- 8
- Part I.B deficiencies
- 2
- Report
- View PDF ↗
Deficiencies (8)
Grouped by issuer and in the same order as the PCAOB report, so each item ties back directly to the source.
Issuer A4 deficiencies
| # | Area | Deficiency | Standard | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Goodwill | The issuer engaged an external specialist (“company's specialist”) to assist in determining a significant assumption used by the issuer in performing its annual impairment analysis for certain goodwill using a Value in Use (VIU) approach. The issuer used various inputs and assumptions some of which the engagement team considered to be significant to prepare the VIU model used in the impairment analysis. The firm selected for testing a control over the valuation of this goodwill that consisted of the performance of an annual impairment analysis and management's review and approval of (1) certain projections and base data produced by the issuer and used by the company's specialist to determine the significant assumption and (2) the impairment analysis performed including the VIU model and carrying amount of the goodwill. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm did not identify and test any controls over the completeness of certain data produced by the issuer that was provided to the company's specialist and used in the operation of this control. (AS 2201.39) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2201.39 | Significant risk |
| 2 | Goodwill | The issuer engaged an external specialist (“company's specialist”) to assist in determining a significant assumption used by the issuer in performing its annual impairment analysis for certain goodwill using a Value in Use (VIU) approach. The issuer used various inputs and assumptions some of which the engagement team considered to be significant to prepare the VIU model used in the impairment analysis. The firm selected for testing a control over the valuation of this goodwill that consisted of the performance of an annual impairment analysis and management's review and approval of (1) certain projections and base data produced by the issuer and used by the company's specialist to determine the significant assumption and (2) the impairment analysis performed including the VIU model and carrying amount of the goodwill. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm did not evaluate the specific review procedures the control owners performed to assess the reasonableness of a significant assumption used by the issuer in the VIU model. (AS 2201.42 and .44) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2201.42; AS 2201.44 | Significant risk |
| 3 | Goodwill | The issuer engaged an external specialist (“company's specialist”) to assist in determining a significant assumption used by the issuer in performing its annual impairment analysis for certain goodwill using a Value in Use (VIU) approach. The issuer used various inputs and assumptions some of which the engagement team considered to be significant to prepare the VIU model used in the impairment analysis. The firm's approach for substantively testing the goodwill for impairment was to test the issuer's process. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm did not perform procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of the significant assumptions used by the company's specialist to determine the significant assumption used by the issuer in performing its annual impairment analysis beyond evaluating the consistency of the assumptions with historical experience and obtaining and reading the report prepared by the company's specialist. Further the firm did not perform procedures to evaluate the work of the company's specialist beyond inquiry and testing the accuracy of certain data used by the company's specialist. (AS 1105.A6-.A10; AS 2501.16) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 1105.A10; AS 1105.A6; AS 1105.A7; AS 1105.A8; AS 1105.A9; AS 2501.16 | Significant risk |
| 4 | Goodwill | The issuer engaged an external specialist (“company's specialist”) to assist in determining a significant assumption used by the issuer in performing its annual impairment analysis for certain goodwill using a Value in Use (VIU) approach. The issuer used various inputs and assumptions some of which the engagement team considered to be significant to prepare the VIU model used in the impairment analysis. The firm's approach for substantively testing the goodwill for impairment was to test the issuer's process. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm did not perform procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of the significant assumptions related to certain projected data used by the issuer in the VIU model including taking into account the issuer's intent and ability to achieve the assumptions and projected data beyond inquiry obtaining a current contract and bid from an external vendor unrelated to the significant assumption and performing a sensitivity analysis. (AS 2501.16 and .17) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2501.16; AS 2501.17 | Significant risk |
Issuer B3 deficiencies
| # | Area | Deficiency | Standard | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Accounts Receivable | The principal auditor instructed the firm to test certain controls over revenue and accounts receivable that consisted of management's review of (1) changes to customer data (2) the accounts receivable and allowance for doubtful accounts (3) credit memos (4) sales reversal entries (5) the rebate reserves and underlying assumptions and (6) the allocation of the total transaction price to the separate performance obligations based on their relative standalone selling prices. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm did not evaluate the review procedures that the control owners performed including the procedures to identify items for follow-up and the procedures to determine whether those items were appropriately resolved. (AS 2201.42 and .44) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2201.42; AS 2201.44 | |
| 2 | Accounts Receivable | The principal auditor instructed the firm to test certain controls over revenue and accounts receivable that consisted of management's review of (1) changes to customer data (2) the accounts receivable and allowance for doubtful accounts (3) credit memos (4) sales reversal entries (5) the rebate reserves and underlying assumptions and (6) the allocation of the total transaction price to the separate performance obligations based on their relative standalone selling prices. The following deficiency was identified: • For certain of these controls the firm did not identify and test any controls over the accuracy and completeness of certain data or reports used in the operation of the controls. (AS 2201.39) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2201.39 | |
| 3 | Accounts Receivable | The principal auditor also instructed the firm to perform certain procedures to substantively test revenue including the performance of a software-assisted analysis to test the relationships among revenue accounts receivable and cash receipts. The reliability of the audit evidence obtained from this analysis was dependent upon the firm's testing of cash receipts data underlying the analysis. To test this data the firm agreed a sample of cash receipts to bank statements and/or customer invoices. The firm did not perform sufficient procedures to evaluate whether the cash receipts data was sufficiently precise and appropriate for use in the analysis because it did not evaluate whether: • the cash receipts of two of the selections were related to sales invoices outstanding in accounts receivables; • the entire cash receipt of one of the selections was related to sales invoices outstanding in accounts receivables using independent information from the customers as the firm only agreed a portion of the cash receipt to a customer invoice; and • the recorded cash reversal against the customer balance of one of the selections related to revenue and a related outstanding accounts receivable or evaluate whether this was a true exception in the context of the testing attributes. (AS 1105.10) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 1105.10 |
Issuer C1 deficiency
| # | Area | Deficiency | Standard | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sales Discounts and Related Accruals | The firm selected for testing three controls over sales discounts and related accruals that consisted of management's (1) review of the accrual calculation and reconciliation of the accrual balance to the general ledger (2) analysis of accrual carryovers and (3) approval of sales discount disbursements. The firm did not identify and test any controls over the accuracy and completeness of certain data used in the operation of these controls. (AS 2201.39) ICFR audit only | AS 2201.39 |