How Auditors Detect / Trap Cash Siphoning : red flagging and documenting evidence
!! Academic Purpose only
🔎 How Auditors Detect / Trap Cash Siphoning
1. Related-Party Transactions (Sec. 40A(2), AS-18 / Ind AS-24)
-
Check disclosures in notes to accounts for related-party names.
-
Verify pricing: Compare payments to related parties vs. market rates.
-
Audit Trail: Match invoices with actual delivery/benefit received.
-
Trap: If related parties are paid more than fair value (inflated expenses), auditor questions management & reports under CARO/Tax Audit (Form 3CD, Clause 23/31).
2. Inflated Expenses
-
Analytical procedures: Compare expense ratios (advertising, consultancy, repairs) vs. past years/industry average.
-
Vouching: Verify supporting bills, contracts, and third-party confirmations.
-
Cash flow check: Expense shown in P&L but no matching service/goods delivered.
-
Trap: Fake vendors or repetitive round invoices without actual service.
3. Round-Tripping of Funds
-
Bank reconciliation: Unusual high-value transactions flowing out and back within short span.
-
Ledger scrutiny: Same set of entities appearing in sales & purchases, or loans given & received.
-
Trap: Circular movement of money without substance → flagged in CARO (“funds advanced and returned”).
4. Mismatch between Profit & Cash Flow
-
High profit but negative OCF (like we discussed).
-
Auditor checks debtor ageing, inventory valuation, advances.
-
Trap: Aggressive sales booked → cash not realized → possible diversion.
5. Third-Party Confirmations
-
Direct confirmation from creditors, lenders, vendors, or related parties.
-
If management resists confirmations → auditor notes “scope limitation.”
-
Trap: If balances differ from client books → possible manipulation.
6. Forensic Techniques (if suspicion is strong)
-
Data analytics: unusual patterns (split payments < ₹20,000 to avoid Section 40A(3)).
-
Benford’s Law analysis (fraud detection in invoice values).
-
KYC of counterparties (fake shell vendors often have same address/phone).
🔹 Auditor’s Reporting Duty
-
CARO 2020 (for companies): Requires reporting on related-party transactions, loans/advances, fund diversion.
-
Form 3CD (Tax Audit): Requires disclosure of related-party payments (Clause 23), cash transactions (Clause 31).
-
If siphoning is suspected → auditor qualifies report or gives Emphasis of Matter.
✅ Summary:
An auditor “traps” cash siphoning by testing related-party payments, verifying expenses, tracking fund flow, seeking confirmations, and reconciling cash flows. Any mismatch or lack of evidence forces management to explain, else auditor qualifies report.
Comments
Post a Comment