Applicability of CARO 2015 For CA IPCC May 2016 Exams


Applicability of CARO 2015 For CA IPCC May 2016 Exams. CARO 2015 – Applicability For CA IPCC May 2016 Exams. Companies (Auditors’ Report) Order, 2015 [CARO]. Here we are providing complete notes for CARO 2015. Companies (Auditor’s Report) Order, 2015 issued by Ministry of Corporate Affairs on 10th April, 2015 is applicable for May 2016 Examination. CARO 2015 is applicable for CA IPCC May 2016 Exams so here we are providing complete details for CARO 2015. Check Other Details from Below.  Now you can scroll down below and check Complete Details regarding Applicability of CARO 2015 For CA IPCC May 2016 Exams.

Applicability of CARO 2015 For CA IPCC May 2016 Exams

Companies (Auditor’s Report) Order, 2015 issued by Ministry of Corporate Affairs on 10th April, 2015  is applicable for May 2016 Examination.

Check – IPCC List of Amendments,Standards, Applicable for May 2016 Exams

1. What types of Companies are specifically exempted from application of CARO?

1. Applicability: CARO 2015 applies to all Companies including a Foreign Company as defined u/s 2(42).

2. Exceptions / Exemptions: CARO does not apply to the following classes of Companies –

  • (a) Banking Company as defined u/s 5(c) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949,
  • (b) Insurance Company as defined Insurance Act, 1938.
  • (c) Company licensed to operate u/s 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 and
  • (d) One percent Company as per Sec.2(62) and a Small Company as per Sec.2(85) of the Companies Act,
  • (e) Private Limited Companies subject to the following conditions –
    • Aggregate of Paid Up Capital and Reserves should not exceed ` 50 Lakhs.
    • Loan outstanding from any Bank or Financial Institution should not exceed ` 25 Lakhs.
    • Turnover should not exceed ` 5 Crores.

2. List the matters to be reported under CARO, 2015.

1. FIXED ASSETS [3(i)]:

(a) Adequacy of Records: Whether or not proper records have been maintained to show full particulars including
quantitative details and details about situation of Fixed Assets.

(b) Verification:
• Whether the Management of the Company has physically verified the Fixed Assets, at reasonable intervals, and
• Whether material discrepancies observed, if any, on such verification have been suitably dealt with in the books of account.

2. INVENTORIES [3(ii)]:

  • Verification: Whether Management has physically verified all the inventories at suitable intervals.
  • Adequacy of procedures: Whether the procedures for physical verification of inventory are reasonable and adequate, having regard to the size of the Company and the nature of its business.
  • Adequacy of Records:
    • Whether the Company is maintaining proper records of inventory, and
    • Whether any material discrepancies were noticed on physical verification and if so, whether the same have been properly dealt with in the books of account.


LOANS GIVEN: Has the Company granted any loans, secured or unsecured, to Companies, Firms or other parties covered in the Register maintained u/s 189 of the Act.

  • Repayment: Whether receipt of the Principal and the interest amount are regular.
  • Steps for recovery: If overdue amount is more than ‘ 1,00,000, whether reasonable steps have been taken by the Company for recovery of Principal and Interest.


  • Adequacy: Is there an adequate Internal Control procedure commensurate with the size of the Company and the nature of its business, for the purchase of inventory and Fixed Assets and for the sale of its goods and services.
  • Correction of Weakness: Whether there is a continuing failure to correct major weaknesses in Internal Control.

5. DEPOSITS FROM PUBLIC [3(v)]: If the Company has accepted Deposits from public, whether the following are complied with –

  • Directives issued by the Reserve Bank of India,
  • Provisions of Sec. 73 to 76 or any other relevant provision of the Companies Act, 2013 and its rules.
  • Orders, if any, passed by the Company Law Board / NCLT / RBI / any Court / Tribunal.
  • The nature of contraventions, if any, should be stated in the Report.

6. COST ACCOUNTING RECORDS [3(vi)]: If the Central Government had prescribed maintenance of Cost Records u/s 148(1), whether or not such accounts and records have been prepared and maintained properly.

7. STATUTORY DUES [3(vii)]:

  • Is the Company regular in depositing Undisputed Statutory Dues including Provident Fund, Employees’ State Insurance, Income Tax, Wealth Tax, Service Tax, Sales Tax, Customs Duty, Excise Duty, Value Added Tax, Cess and any other Statutory dues with the appropriate authorities. If not paid regularly, the extent of the arrears of outstanding statutory dues as at the last day of the Financial Year concerned for a period of more than 6 months from the date they became payable, shall be indicated in the Report.
  • If such non-payment of dues is on account of any dispute, then the amount involved and the forum where the dispute is pending should also be mentioned.
  • Whether the amount required to be transferred to Investor Education and Protection Fund in accordance with the provision of Companies Act, 1956 has been transferred to such fund within time.

8. LOSS MAKING COMPANIES [3(viii]: In case of a Company which has been registered for a period not less than five years, the following should be reported :

  • Whether the Accumulated Losses at the end of the relevant Financial Year exceeded 50% of the Company’s Net Worth,
  • Whether the Company has incurred Cash Losses in the immediately preceding Financial Year.


  • Has the Company paid the Principal and Interest dues to Financial Institutions, Banks or Debentureholders without default,
  • In case of default, the period and the amount of default shall be reported.

10. GUARANTEES GIVEN [3(x)]: Where the Company has given any guarantee for loans taken by others from Bank or Financial Institutions, whether or not the terms and conditions thereof are prejudicial to the interest of the Company.

11. END USE OF BORROWINGS [3(xi)] : Whether or not Term Loans are applied for the purpose for which such loans were obtained.

12. FRAUD [3(xii)]: Whether any Fraud on or by the Company has been noticed or reported during the year. Where any Fraud is noticed and reported, the nature and the amount involved should be indicated.

Reasons to be stated for unfavourable or qualified answers [Para 4]

  1. Where the answer to any of the above questions is unfavourable or qualified, the Auditor’s Report shall state the reasons for such unfavourable or qualified answer, as the case may be.
  2. If the Auditor is unable to express any opinion in answer to any particular question, his Report shall indicate such fact, together with reasons why it is not possible for him to give an answer to such a question.

3. CA Vishwam is appointed as the Branch Auditor of VVK Ltd. Is he required to comply with the CARO when issuing his Branch Audit Report, or is CARO applicable only with respect to the Audit Report issued by the Principal Auditor?

  1. 143(8) specifies that a Branch Auditor has the same duties in respect of Audit as the Company’s Auditor.
  2. The Report submitted by the Branch Auditor should contain a statement on all the matters specified in CARO, to enable the Company’s Auditor to consider the same. Hence, CARO is applicable for Branch Audits also.

4. Krishna Ltd is a registered Non-Banking Financial Company which does the business of Lease Financing. Comment whether CARO is applicable for this Company.

Refer to applicability and exemption from CARO in Q.1 above. CARO is applicable to all Companies.

Banks are exempted from CARO. However, NBFCs are not exempt. Hence, CARO is applicable to Krishna Ltd.

5. BK Ltd, a Benefit Fund, registered under NBFC Regulations, is in existence for the past two decades. On 31st December 2014, this Company is converted into a Bank. You have been appointed as an Auditor for the Financial Year 2014-2015. Comment whether CARO is applicable for this Company.

Refer to applicability and exemption from CARO in Q.1 above.

As on the date of B/Sheet, the Company is a Banking Company. Hence, CARO is not applicable, irrespective of the fact that the Company was converted from NBFC during the year.

6. Mittal Pvt Ltd provides the following information for the Financial Year 2014-2015. Comment whether CARO is applicable for this Company: (a) Paid-up Share Capital and Reserves – ‘ 50 Lakhs, (b) Outstanding Loans from Banks – ‘ 24 Lakhs, Turnover – ‘ 6 Crores.

Refer to applicability and exemption from CARO in Q.1 above.

To be exempt from CARO, a Private Limited Company must satisfy all the prescribed conditions cumulatively. Even if one of the conditions is not satisfied, the Private Limited Company’s Auditor has to report on the matters specified in CARO. Hence, CARO is applicable in the above case, since Turnover condition is attracted.

7. Vayu Pvt Ltd has a Turnover of ‘ 4 Crores for the Financial Year 2014-2015. The Outstanding Balance of Loans from Banks and Financial Institutions is ‘ 24 Lakhs throughout the year. The Company had a Capital of ‘ 60 Lakhs at the beginning of the year and on 15.09.2014 the Company made a Buy Back of Shares worth ‘ 20 Lakhs resulting in a Share Capital of ’40 Lakhs as on 31st March 2015. Comment whether CARo is applicable for the Company.

Refer to applicability and exemptions from CARO in Q.12 above.

  1. CARO is applicable to a Private Company if, at any point of time, during the Financial Year covered by the Audit Report, the conditions relating to – (a) Paid-Up Capital & Reserves, or (b) Loan Outstanding, or (c) Turnover, are satisfied.
  2. In the present situation, Vayu Pvt Ltd’s Share Capital was ‘ 60 Lakhs at the beginning of the year, thus exceeding the limits laid down in CARO. Hence, CARO is applicable.

8. Prithvi Pvt Ltd has Outstanding Payable balances of ‘ 15 Lakhs with SBI, ‘ 16 Lakhs HSBC and ‘ 17 Lakhs with ICICI as on 31st Comment on the applicability of CARO to this Company.

  1. “Any Bank or Financial Institution (FI)”, would refer to the Aggregate to all Loans and not with reference to each Bank or Financial Institution.
  2. In the given case, the aggregate of Loans Outstanding = 15 Lakhs +16 Lakhs + 17 Lakhs = ‘ 48 Lakhs (exceeds the limit). Hence, CARO is applicable.

9. AP Pvt Ltd has borrowed ‘ 80 Lakhs on 15th June 2014 and repaid the entire loan before 31st March 2015. Comment on the applicability of CARO to this Company.

  1. Balance Outstanding from a Bank or Financial Institution for the purpose of applicability of CARO, shall be construed at any point of time during the year and not as at the end of the year (i.e. 31st of March).
  2. Where the Company had taken a Loan from a Bank in excess of ‘ 25 Lakhs during the year, but the year-end balance of the same is NIL, the Company would be covered by CARO, notwithstanding that it fulfills all other conditions for exemption from the Order. In the present case, AP Pvt Ltd will be covered under CARO.

10. A Pvt Ltd is incorporated on 1st July 2015. During the year ended 31st March 2016, it had issued Shares (fully paid up) of ‘ 40 Lakhs, had borrowed ‘ 7.5 Lakhs each from 2 Financial Institutions and its Turnover (Net of Excise of ‘ 50 Lakhs which is credited to a separate account) is ‘ 475 Lakhs. Will CARO be applicable to A Pvt Ltd?

Note: Refer to the conditions for exemption of Private Companies, given in Q.1 above.

  1. Aggregate of Paid Up Capital and Reserves is ‘ 40 Lakhs (lower than the specified limit of ‘ 50 Lakhs).
  2. Total Loans outstanding = 7.5 Lakhs x 2 = ‘ 15 Lakhs (lower than the specified limit of ‘ 25 Lakhs).
  3. If Excise Duty is taken / credited to a separate account, it shall not form part of the Turnover. Hence, Turnover for this Company = ’75 Crores (lower than the specified limit of ‘ 5 Crores).

Hence, CARO does not apply to A Pvt Ltd, since all the conditions relating to exemption are satisfied.

11. T Pvt Ltd’s Paid Up Capital and Reserves are less than ‘ 50 Lakhs and it has no Outstanding Loan exceeding ‘ 25 Lakhs from any Bank or Financial Institution. Its Sales are ‘ 6 Crores before deducting Trade Discount ‘ 10 Lakhs and Sales Returns ‘ 95 Lakhs. The services rendered by the Company amounted to ‘ 10 Lakhs. Comment on applicability of CARO to this Company.

Note: Refer to the conditions for exemption of Private Companies, given in Q.1 above.

  1. Aggregate of Paid up Capital is less than ‘ 50 Lakhs
  2. Loan from Banks and Financial Institutions is less than ‘ 25 Lakhs.
  3. Turnover = [Sales ‘ 6 Crores – Trade Discount ‘ 10 Lakhs – Returns ‘ 95 Lakhs] + Services Income ‘ 10 Lakhs = Net ‘ 5.05 Crores.(more than the specified limit of ‘ 5 Crores)

Hence, CARO applies to T Pvt. Ltd, since the Turnover exceeds ‘ 5 crores.

12. Comment on the following extracts from the Statutory Auditor’s reports on the accounts of Limited Companies indicating with reasons, whether or not the form of reporting complies with the statutory and professional requirements – “On the basis of examination, the valuation of Inventories is fair and proper and in accordance with normally accepted accounting principles, and is on the same basis as in the previous year except for some changes in the method of valuation of the inventories of Finished Goods”.

CARO Requirements: Refer to Clause 3(ii) Point 2 of CARO.

  1. Principle: AS-2 requires that any change in the accounting policy relating to Inventories which has a material effect in the current period or which is reasonably expected to have a material effect in later periods should be disclosed. When there is a change in accounting policy (which has a material effect in the current period) the amount by which any item in the Financial Statements is affected by such change should also be disclosed to the extent ascertainable. Where such amount is not ascertainable, wholly or in part, the fact should be indicated.
  2. Conclusion:
  • Change in basis of Inventory Valuation amounts to a change in the basis of accounting. If the effect on profit is material, adequate disclosure should be made in the accounts or notes.
  • The Auditor should ensure such change in method of valuation (including quantification of effect on the Financial Statements) should be disclosed in the Financial Statements or in the Notes. Else, he would not have satisfied the statutory reporting requirements.

13. A Public Company defaulted in the repayment of deposits together with interest on the due date for more than a year and the CFO contends that the Auditor need not report on the default committed by the Company. Comment.

Deposits from Public: Refer to Clause 3(v) Point 5 of CARO

In view of the above, the Auditor should report on default committed by the Company.

Note: Students may also refer to Sec.143(3)(g), i.e. Reporting on Directors’ Disqualification u/s 164(2).

14. A Company having several departments with separate payrolls and where payments of wages are spread over several days, makes lump-sum deposits of estimated amounts of Provident Fund and Employees State Insurance dues and adjusts the excess or deficit against the following month’s deposit. Comment on the above.

Note: Refer to Clause 3(vii) Point 7 of CARO

  1. In case of a large Company where there are a number of departments with separate payrolls and where payments are spread over a number of days, the collection of data regarding the PF / ESI collection and the Company’s contribution thereto may take some time.
  2. To avoid delayed payments, the Company may make lumpsum deposits of estimated amounts and adjust the excess or deficit against the following month’s deposit.
  3. If this method is consistently followed and the difference between the total dues and the lumpsum deposit is not material, it can be deemed as regularly deposited and hence, no adverse comment is necessary.

15. ABC Ltd has not deposited Provident Fund Contributions of ‘ 20 Lakhs to the authorities, but accounted in the books. Comment on the above.

  1. Accrual: Provident Fund contributions should be accounted in the books on accrual basis, whether paid or not. As per Sec.128(1) a Company has to maintain proper books of account, on accrual basis of accounting.
  2. Companies Act: Under Sec.143(3)(e), the Auditor shall state whether the Balance Sheet and the Profit & Loss Account comply with the Accounting Standards u/s 133.
  3. CARO Requirements: Note: Refer to Clause 3(vii) Point 7 of CARO.
  4. Conclusion: In the instant case, even though accrual principles have been followed, disclosure of non- payment is necessary in view of CARO. The Auditor should disclose the fact of non-payment of ‘ 20 Lakhs in his Report.

16. During the course of audit of ABC Ltd, it is noticed that out of ‘ 12 Lakhs of PF Contributions accounted in the books, only ‘ 2 Lakhs has been remitted to the authorities during the year. On enquiry, the Chief Accountant informed that due to financial problems they have not remitted but will remit the same as and when the position improves. As a Statutory Auditor, how would you deal with the above situation?

Note: Refer to Clause 3(vii) Point 9 of CARO.

Conclusion: In the given case, the Company has not complied with the requirements as to deposit of PF contributions, to the tune of ‘ 10 Lakhs. Financial problems do not constitute sufficient reason for non-compliance. Hence, the Auditor shall report the non-compliance under Clause 3(vii) of CARO in his report.

17. USA Industries Limited has constituted “Investor Education and Protection Fund” as required under the Companies Act, but so far no amounts have been deposited into the said account. Whether the Auditor should report the same in CARO.

  1. Creation of Fund: “Investor Education and Protection Fund” can be established only by Central Government. The Company shall only transfer the Unclaimed Dividend, Unclaimed Deposits, etc. from the Special Bank Account to the Investor Education and Protection Fund established by CG.
  2. Reporting under CARO: Auditor shall determine the amount to be transferred to Investor Education and Protection Fund. In case of delay in transferring the same, he should report the delay under Clause 3(vii)(c) of CARO.

18. Mani Ltd had obtained a Term Loan of ‘ 300 Lakhs from a Bank for the construction of a Factory. Since there was a delay in the construction activities, the said funds were temporarily invested in Short Term Deposits. Comment.

  1. Clause 3(xi) of CARO requires the Auditor to report on whether or not Term Loans are applied for the purpose for which such loans were obtained.
  2. During the Construction phase, Companies, generally, temporarily invest the surplus funds to reduce the cost of capital or for other business reasons. However, subsequently the same are utilized for the stated objectives.
  3. In such cases, the Auditor should mention the fact that pending utilization of the Term Loan for the stated purpose, the funds were temporarily used for the purpose other than for which the loan was sanctioned but were ultimately utilized for the stated end-use.

19. During the course of production, a Company accumulates huge quantity of Scraps and certain By-Products. The Scraps are sold by auction and for the sale of By-Products, reasonable records are maintained, but no records are maintained for recording the generation of Scraps and By-Products and accordingly not being satisfied with the state of affairs, you want to qualify your report. But Management views that under CARO, the Auditor is not required to report about maintenance of records in connection with generation of Scraps and By-Products. Comment on the view of the Management.

1. CARO Requirements: The following reporting requirements of CARO are relevant in this regard –

  • Internal Control [3(iv)]: Refer to Clause 3(iv) Point 4 of CARO.
  • Cost Accounting Records [3(vi)7* Refer to Clause 3(vi) Point 6 of CARO.
  • Fraud [3(xii)]: Refer to Clause 3(xii) Point 12 of CARO.

2. Observations:

  • Since the quantum of Scrap and By-Products is considerable, it appears that maintenance of records for generation as well as records for sale of Scrap/ By-Products is necessary, but the Company has not maintained such records.
  • The Auditor has to evaluate and consider the effect of non-maintenance of records for Scrap & By-Products in the light of – (a) effectiveness of internal control system, (b) compliance with Cost Accounting (Records) Rules, where applicable, & (c) possibility of frauds in relation to such Scrap & By-Products.
  • The Auditor will have to issue an adverse comment on non-maintenance of reasonable records for sale of Scrap/ By-Products and decide on the aspect of records on generation, on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case.

20 Purchases of Raw Materials by a business were supported by Invoices, Challans and Receipts of Suppliers. Invoices were authorised by the Purchase Manager and payments were made to the Suppliers by Account Payee “Cheques”. After the accounts were audited, it was discovered that the Raw Materials were purchased at inflated prices resulting in a loss of ‘ 3 Lakhs to the business. Will the Auditor be held liable in this connection?

1. CARO Requirements: In the given case, the purchase of materials have been documented by Invoices, Challans acknowledging actual supply, payment by Account Payee Cheques and valid receipts from Suppliers. It is also observed that the Auditor has verified the purchase transactions. The Auditor’s reporting duties in this regard under CARO involve the following –

  • Internal Control [3(iv)]: Refer to Clause 3(iv) Point 4 of CARO.
  • Fraud [3(xii)]: Refer to Clause 3(xii) Point 12 of CARO.

2. Auditors’ Duties:

  • The Auditor had examined the Company’s Internal Control System in relation to purchases, e.g. procedures like obtaining quotations from competitive Suppliers, analysis thereof to choose the Supplier, and placing the order on a correct understanding of the terms contained in the quotations.
  • The Auditor is also required to examine whether there has been any fraud detected / noticed / reported in relation to purchases.

3. Conclusion: If the Auditor had properly examined all these and also had satisfied himself about compliance of these in placing orders for purchases of Raw Materials, he will not be liable for the excess price paid. However, if he has not exercised due care and diligence in the performance of his duties, he may be guilty of negligence.

6 thoughts on “Applicability of CARO 2015 For CA IPCC May 2016 Exams

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *