Financial Ratios And Audit Procedures: A Case Study Of DIPL Ltd.

Financial Ratios Computed for DIPL Ltd.

Audit is an independent examination of the financial statement performed by the auditors in order to give an unbiased opinion about it. The auditing procedure is broadly classified into two categories- substantive procedures and analytical procedures. The analytical procedures deal with the calculation of the significant accounting ratios that enables to analyse the performance and position of the company and compare the current status with that of the past periods (Basu, 2009). This helps the auditor to understand the financial statement in a more better and precise manner. The auditor sets up an enquiry if he finds that there are certain manipulations done in the financial statements. He extends the nature and timing of carrying out his audit procedures.

According to the case study of DIPL Ltd. , following are the few financial ratios calculated to evaluate the performance of the company for the year ended:

1. Current ratio

PARTICULARS	2013	2014 Save Time On Research and Writing Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper. Get My Paper	2015
CURRENT ASSETS	5385938	7509150	9600929
CURRENT LIABILITIES	3780000	5120250	6397500
CURRENT RATIO ( CURRENT ASSETS/CURRENT LIABILITIES)	1.42	1.47	1.50

Current ratio can be calculated by dividing current assets by current liabilities. This ratio is classified as liquidity ratio as it evaluates the capability of the company to meet it short term liabilities with the help of short term assets of the company. As we can see in the above table, the current ratio is growing over the years. This is a positive sign for liquidity as the company has a strong financial health to meet its current liabilities.

1. Debt to Equity ratio.

PARTICULARS	2013	2014	2015
INTEREST-BEARING DEBTS	0	0	7500000
SHAREHOLDER’S EQUITY	9150000	10783650	12250491
DEBT TO EQUITY RATIO (TOTAL DEBT/SHAREHOLDER’S EQUITY)	0.00	0.00	0.61

Debt appears on the liability side of the balance sheet and there is always a burden on the company to pay off in the future. In this case study, we can find that there was no debt in the initial two years but subsequently in the third year the company had to raise debt which increased the debt equity ratio from 0 to 0.61. Although the ratio is not very high but when compared to previous years it does not reflect a good financial health(Blank, 2014).

1. Net profit margin

PARTICULARS	2013	2014	2015
NET EARNINGS	2359190	2291362	2972183
NET REVENUES	34212000	37699500	43459500
NET PROFIT MARGIN [(NET PROFIT/NET REVENUES)*100]	6.90%	6.08%	6.84%

Net profit margin shows the financial performance of the company at the year end. However, we can also compare the net profit of the company over the years. It is clearly visible to us in the above graph that in the year to 2014 there was a fall in the net profit which reflects the inefficiency in the working of the management. The net profit of the year 2015 is slightly lower than the year 2013 which shows that the company needs to be more efficient towards its workings Boynton & Johnson, 2006)..

1. Interest Coverage Ratio.

PARTICULARS	2013	2014	2015
NET EARNINGS	2359190	2291362	2972183
INCOME TAX EXPENSE	1011081	982012	87116
INTEREST EXPENSE	84379	83663	808038
EBIT ( EARNINGS BEFORE INTEREST AND TAX)	3454650	3357037	3867337
INTEREST COVERAGE RATIO ( EBIT/INTEREST EXPENSE)	40.94	40.13	4.79

The method of calculating interest coverage ratio is to divide the net income of the company by earnings before interest and tax expenses (EBIT). The interest coverage ratio is calculated to see whether the company earns sufficient profits to pay interest on the amount of the debt borrowed by the company. It is adverse for the company if the ratio falls which is clearly seen in the graph above (Cahill & Kane, 2011).

1. Return on assets.

PARTICULARS	2013	2014	2015
NET INCOME	2359190	2291362	2972183
TOTAL ASSETS	12930000	15903900	26147991
RETURN ON ASSETS (NET INCOME/TOTAL ASSETS)*100	18.25%	14.41%	11.37%

Return to asset is calculated by dividing net income by the total assets. This asset helps in the determination whether the company is making optimum utilisation of its assets or not. If the company is using the assets efficiently then the graph will be upwards which is favourable whereas if the company is not being able to make full utilisation of the assets that are present in the company then the graph will slope downwards. A downward sloping graph is not considered good (GUPTA., 2016).

1. Proprietory ratio.

Audit Procedures Performed for DIPL Ltd.

PARTICULARS	2013	2014	2015
SHAREHOLDER’S FUND	9150000	10783650	12250491
TOTAL ASSETS	12930000	15903900	26147991
PROPRIETARY RATIO (SHAREHOLDER’S FUNDS/TOTAL ASSETS)	0.71	0.68	0.47

A company calculates the proprietary ratio by dividing the total of shareholders fund by the total assets of the company. It helps in determining the capitalisation done in order to manage and support the business. As we know, it is not possible to carry on business without assets. So, the proprietary ratio helps to know the proportion of shareholders fund that has been invested in the assets of the company (Horngren, 2017)..

While performing the audit procedure the auditor always faces risk at two levels which will be discussed further below. These risks are basically relating to any material changes or any misstatements that may be involved in the preparation of the financial statements. The two levels at which risk is observed are- financial level and assertion level.

First- Financial level risk is the one which is related to the financial statements of the company. Such risk may include shortage in the required resources, inefficient management and control system of the company, unusual transactions and difficulty in taking situations

Second- Assertion level risk further involves two types of risk- inherent risk and control risk. Control risk is the errors or frauds that couldn’t be handled by the management. In simpler language, if there occurs such error in the financial statement which cannot be separated then such risk is known as control risk (Griffin, 2009). Assertion risk refers to presence of errors in the financial statements either by an individual or a group of individuals which has a material impact on the financial information of the company.

As per the case study of DIPL ltd, the two major inherent risk are described below:

1. Inventory valuation- There are various methods to do valuation of the inventory. The method of valuation of inventory followed by DIPL ltd is weighted average method. Inventory valuation has a great importance as it indirectly affects the profits of the company. The wrong valuation of the inventory may overstate or understate the closing stock of the company which may give a inappropriate information about the financial performance of the company (Hooks, 2011). Suppose, if the closing inventory is 20 units, purchases made during the year is 200 units of Rs.3000 and the opening inventory of 100 units is Rs.1000. If we follow average method then the value of stock per unit comes out to be Rs.13.34, so the total closing stock will be Rs. 267 but actually the 20 units left is left from the purchases made at Rs.15 per unit. Hence, the conclusion is that the closing stock should be valued at Rs. 300. Now we know that if the closing stock is understated then the profits for the year will also be less than the actual profit of the company (Knechel, Salterio & Ballou, 2017). The company proposed to change its method of valuation from weighted average to FIFO in June, 2015. It decided to do so in order to hide the extra profits earned behing the valuation of closing stock which is wrong. If the company does this then there will be  a rise in the closing stock of the company, it is expected to be 56% more than what it was in the year 2014 which will result in showing higher profits. Such higher profits will mislead the investors as it would make them feel that the company is in a good financial health. The creditors or the lenders may also get misled and provide them funds which could be resulting of loss in the future (Messier, 2016).
2. Unusual pressure within the entity- We may say after reading the case study that there are certain factors that force us to believe that there is a presence of some kind of unusual pressure or a certain kind of error of fraud that is happening in the company which it is trying to hide.  The following points describe the unusual pressure that are identified:

• A new internal audit team was set up in the middle of the year also it is seen that the company closes its book in the month of June which is a kind of unusual activity. This has created a doubt in the management whether there are some fraudulent activities going on in the company (Ramaswamy, 2015). Also, it is observed that a new CEO has been appointed. Therefore, enquiries have to be done to the previous CEO as it is important to know the reason for the change.
• A loan of 7.5 million was taken by the company. The lender of the loan was BDO finance. The company invested a huge amount of funds in the assets as well as it also spent money on installing the IT system. Apart from this it also made one huge expense that was taking over another company whose name was nuclear publishing limited. It was a matter of concern when it was identified that the purchase value of the plant and equipment exceeded the loan amount. So, it is clear that the expenses and the funds borrowed are not justifiable (Khan and Jain, 2013)..

The responsibility of the auditor is to provide an unbiased opinion of the financial statement and to identify if there are any major misstatements in them which could have a material impact. However, the opinion of the auditor is not the assurance if the future viability (Whittington & Pany, 2016). It is the duty of the auditor to identify the misstatements caused due to inefficiency in financial reporting and if the company has made any manipulation with the figures of the assets of the company. It is not the duty of the auditor to extend its audit procedures to find out if there is any fraud happening because it requires the skill of legal determination theory which is obviously not the expertise of the auditor.

Fraud risk factors are present only if there is a presence of fraud in the company. The conditions are as follows:

1. The workers or the management are not provided the proper working conditions which may create a pressure on them.
2. There are many opportunities available to them in order to commit fraud.
3. The fraudulent activities are being rationalised by the persons committing it.

As per the given case study of DIPL ltd, the following are the two risk factors that has been identified (PAVAN, 2014):

1. Set up of new IT system- The Company introduced a new IT system in the month of June itself. It advised the department to make the accounting system fully computerised. It was not concerned whether the necessary training was provided to the workers or not, it just wanted to install the system without even testing it. When the new IT system was introduced all the accounts had to be transferred which created a huge mess in IT department. This mess also gave advantage to some who were involved in doing some fraud as they could cover it up.
2. Recognition of storage fees from ‘E-book facilities- A storage fees was charged from the publishers to keep their e-books on the website. However, the proper accounting principle was not followed while recording such fees transactions. The fees were received in advance for a year, the recognition for which was done in the month of invoice outstanding (Pitt, 2014).. As we know, this is a violation of the accounting principle as this should not be treated as revenue but should rather be treated as a current liability in the books. This board accepted the fact that the transaction can be recorded only after providing the service. However, this change took place because of the newly set up internal audit team.

References

Basu, S. (2009). Fundamentals of auditing. Delhi: Pearson.

Blank, R. (2014). The Basics of Quality Auditing. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.

Boynton, W., & Johnson, R. (2006). Modern Auditing. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons.

Cahill, L., & Kane, R. (2011). Environmental health and safety audits. Lanham, MD:Government Institutes.

Griffin, M. (2009). MBA fundamentals. New York, NY: Kaplan.

GUPTA. (2016). FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING FOR MANAGEMENT. [S.l.]: PEARSON EDUCATION INDIA.

Horngren, C., Datar, S. and Rajan, M. (2017). Horngren’s cost accounting. Harlow, Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Hooks, K. (2011). Auditing and assurance services. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Knechel, W., Salterio, S., & Ballou, B. (2017). Auditing. New York: Routledge.

Messier, W. (2016). Auditing & assurance services. [Place of publication not identifiedMcgraw-Hill Education.

Khan, M. and Jain, P. (2013). Management accounting. New Delhi, India: McGraw-Hill Education (India).

Kumar, P. (2014). CA-IPCC Auditing and Assurance. Delhi, India: S. Chand Publishing.

Pitt, S. (2014). Internal audit quality. Hoboken: Wiley.

Ramaswamy, M. (n.d.). Finance for nonfinancial managers.

Whittington, O., & Pany, K. (2016). Principles of auditing & other assurance services. NewYork, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Education.