ACCT6006 Auditing Theory and Practice

ACCT6006 Assessment 3 Brief – Group Case Study Page 1 of 6

ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Name ACCT6006 Auditing Theory and Practice
Assessment Assessment 3 – Case Study
Individual/Group Group (maximum three students)
Length 2,200 words (+/- 10%)
Learning Outcomes a) Describe the nature of auditing and critically evaluate the
benefits and limitations of financial statement audits.
b) Explain the current legal and ethical responsibilities of auditors
including the application of the Accounting Professional and
Ethical Standards.
c) Explain the fundamentals of audit planning, audit risk and
materiality.
d) Demonstrate application of methodologies involved in the
provision of audit services.
e) Describe the process of compiling an audit report and
completing an audit engagement.
Submission By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Week 10
Weighting 25%
Total Marks 100 Marks

Task Summary
Students are required to work in the group with maximum of three members. The assessment is
designed to assess the subject learning outcomes above including students’ ability to research audit
related issues and apply their knowledge to real cases. Students are expected to develop a
professional report addressing tasks within following areas:

i.
ii.
iii.
Inheret risk identification
Audit procedures in response to inherent risks identified
Analytical review of the financial statemets with the purpose of identifying areas of concern
or comfort
Susbtantive audit procedures addressing the identified risks
iv.

v. Audit report, its basis and legal issues
The report should be completed as a Business Report including Excective summary, Introduction,
Body (covering all tasks) and Conclusion sections.
Context:
The case study requires students to work in a group and develop a professional report.
ACCT6006 Assessment 3 Brief – Group Case Study Page 2 of 6
A key aspect in your group’s choice of format/layout should be to ensure you impart your key
messages effectively (i.e., complete the requirements) and efficiently (i.e., it should be succinct and
take into account the word limit).
The report should be coherent and consistency is expected throughout (e.g., formatting, language
style, linkages between the parts).
Note, groups who split up the requirements and work independently are likely to have more
difficulty accomplishing this objective compared to groups who work on each of the parts
collaboratively (i.e., as an ‘audit team’).
Referencing
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more
information on referencing : http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing
Submission Instructions:
Complete all tasks and submit your answers electronically using the link on BlackBoard under
assessments overview and submission. Include the names and student ID numbers of the team
members on the assignment cover sheet. Only one version of the assessment is to be submitted on
behalf of the group. Please ensure that your submission is in compliance with all of Torrens Policies.
ACCT6006 Assessment 3 Brief – Group Case Study Page 3 of 6
Instructions:
Review the Financial Year 2019 audited annual reports including financial statements presented to the
shareholders for the following organisations:

AGL Energy Ltd
Qantas Ltd

Assume that your audit team is responsible for planning the audits for both companies for the most
recent financial year. Discuss your strategies addressing each of the tasks below:
1. Identify at least three inherent risks that you would have to consider for each company in the
audit planning phase and justify your answer. Cite the relevant ASAs/ISAs to support your
answer. (18 Marks)
2. Which audit procedures and/or tasks would you have planned to carry out in response to
the inherent risks identified above? Cite the relevant ASAs/ISAs to support your answer.
(18 Marks)
3. Carry out an analytical review on the financial statements of these companies in the planning
phase and identify areas of concern (high risk, problem areas) or comfort. Identify at least
three areas for each company and justify your answer. (18 Marks)
4. Which audit procedures and/or tasks would you have planned to carry out in response to the
high risks or problem areas identified above? Alternatively, in relation to which area would
you have minimised your evidence gathering procedure? (17 Marks)
5. Discuss ethical and legal responiblities/liabilities of the auditors in case they would have given
an inappropriate audit opinion. Discuss safeguards available to the auditors. (9 Marks)
Presentation quality and peer review
The report should be coherent and consistency is expected throughout (e.g., formatting, language
style, and linkages between the parts).
Each group member is required to assess other members on the basis of collaboration and
contribution towards the assessment tasks. Please include the peer review commentary at the end
of your assessment after the conclusion section. Peer review marks have to be allocated in line with
the learning rubric placed at the end of the assessment brief.
ACCT6006_Assessment 3 Brief: Group Case Study T1 2020 Page 4 of 6
Learning Rubric: Assessment ACCT6006 Case Study

Assessment Criteria Fail
(Unacceptable)
0-49%
Pass
(Functional)
50-64%
Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%
Distinction
(Advanced)
75 -84%
High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Knowledge and
understanding
(technical and
theoretical knowledge)
20 %
Limited understanding of
required concepts and
knowledge.
Key components of the
assignment are not
addressed.
0 – 9.99 Marks
Knowledge or
understanding of the field
or discipline.
Resembles a recall or
summary of key ideas.
Often confuses assertion of
personal opinion with
information substantiated
by evidence from the
research/course materials.
10 – 12.99 Marks
Thorough knowledge or
understanding of the
field or discipline/s.
Supports personal
opinion and information
substantiated by
evidence from the
research/course
materials.
Demonstrates a capacity
to explain and apply
relevant concepts.
13 – 8.5 Marks
Highly developed
understanding of the field or
discipline/s.
Discriminates between
assertion of personal opinion
and information
substantiated by robust
evidence from the
research/course materials
and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity
to explain and apply relevant
concepts.
15 – 16.99 Marks
A sophisticated understanding
of the field or discipline/s.
Systematically and critically
discriminates between
assertion of personal opinion
and information substantiated
by robust evidence from the
research/course materials and
extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and
application to new
situations/further
learning.
17 -20 Marks
Evaluation of
information selected to
support the case study
60%
Limited understanding of
key concepts required to
support the case study.
Confuses logic and
emotion. Information
taken from reliable
sources but without a
coherent analysis or
synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are
taken as fact with little
questioning.
Resembles a recall or
summary of key ideas.
Often conflates/confuses
assertion of personal
opinion with information
substantiated by evidence
from the research/course
materials.
Analysis and evaluation do
not reflect expert
judgement, intellectual
independence, rigor and
adaptability.
Supports personal
opinion and information
substantiated by
evidence from the
research/course
materials.
Demonstrates a capacity
to explain and apply
relevant concepts.
Questions viewpoints of
experts.
Discriminates between
assertion of personal opinion
and information
substantiated by robust
evidence from the
research/course materials
and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity
to explain and apply relevant
concepts.
Analysis and evaluation
reflect growing judgement,
intellectual independence,
rigor and adaptability.
Systematically and critically
discriminates between
assertion of personal opinion
and information substantiated
by robust evidence from the
research/course materials and
extended reading.
Information is taken from
sources with a high level of
interpretation/evaluation to
develop a comprehensive
critical analysis or synthesis.
Identifies gaps in knowledge.

ACCT6006_Assessment 3 Brief: Group Case Study T1 2020 Page 5 of 6

Assessment Criteria Fail
(Unacceptable)
0-49%
Pass
(Functional)
50-64%
Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%
Distinction
(Advanced)
75 -84%
High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
0 – 29.9 Marks 30 – 38.99 Marks 39 – 44.9 Marks 45- 50.99 Marks Exhibits intellectual
independence, rigor, good
judgement and adaptability.
51- 60 Marks
Effective
Communication
10 %
Difficult to understand, no
logical/clear structure,
poor flow of ideas,
argument lacks supporting
evidence.
Line of reasoning is often
difficult to follow.
0 – 4.99 Marks
Information, arguments and
evidence are presented in a
way that is not always clear
and logical.
Line of reasoning is often
difficult to follow.
5 – 6.49 Marks
Information, arguments
and evidence are well
presented, mostly clear
flow of ideas and
arguments.
Line of reasoning is easy
to follow.
6.5 – 7.49 Marks
Information, arguments and
evidence are very well
presented; the
communication is logical,
clear and well supported by
evidence.
7.5 – 8.49 Marks
Expertly presented; the
communication is logical,
persuasive, and well
supported by evidence,
demonstrating a clear flow of
ideas and arguments
8.5- 10 Marks
Correct citation of key
resources and evidence
5 %
Demonstrates
inconsistent use of good
quality, credible and
relevant resources to
support and develop
ideas.
0 – 2.49 Marks
Demonstrates use of
credible and relevant
resources to support and
develop ideas, but these
are not always explicit or
well developed.
2.5 – 3.24 Marks
Demonstrates use of
high quality, credible and
relevant resources to
support and develop
ideas.
3.25 – 3.74 Marks
Demonstrates use of good
quality, credible and relevant
resources to support and
develop arguments and
statements. Shows evidence
of wide scope within the
organisation for sourcing
evidence
3.75- 4.24 Marks
Demonstrates use of high
quality, credible and relevant
resources to support and
develop arguments and
position statements. Shows
evidence of wide scope within
and without the organisation
for sourcing evidence
4.25 – 5 Marks
Peer Review
5 %
The student has shown no
real effort and
contribution to the team.
Other team members had
to contribute more as a
result of it and take on
some of the tasks agreed
to be delivered by this
member of the group.
0 – 2.49 Marks
The student has completed
part of the agreed task and
has overlooked some. The
student has not been
initiating much of the team
group effort and has been
more passive member of
the group.
2.5 – 3.24 Marks
The student has been
following instructions of
one or more team
members. The student
has contributed to the
team efforts as per
agreed tasks, but has not
gone beyond that.
3.25 – 3.74 Marks
The student has been a very
valuable member of the team
actively contributing to the
team effort and the group
assessment outcome.
3.75- 4.24 Marks
The student has been a key
member of the group. Taking
initiative and extensively
contributing to the group
assessment effort.
4.25 – 5 Marks

The post ACCT6006 Auditing Theory and Practice appeared first on My Assignment Online.