Review Report on Code - Printable Version

Review Report on Code - Printable Version

+- Accountancy Forum (https://www.accountancy.com.pk/forum)
+-- Forum: The Profession (https://www.accountancy.com.pk/forum/forum-the-profession)
+--- Forum: Accounting and Audit (https://www.accountancy.com.pk/forum/forum-accounting-and-audit)
+--- Thread: Review Report on Code (/thread-review-report-on-code)

Review Report on Code - wsafca - 10-14-2009

Dear Members

Recently on August 11, 2009 ICAP has issued some circular, requiring to further add a Para In the Review Report On Compliance with Code of Corporate Governance.

Is it mandatory to issue the report for the year ended June 30, 2009 as per new format?

Regards

Ahmed

- farazkpmg - 10-15-2009

Can u send me the link please

- awaisaftab - 10-15-2009

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by wsafca
 Dear Members

Recently on August 11, 2009 ICAP has issued some circular, requiring to further add a Para In the Review Report On Compliance with Code of Corporate Governance.

Is it mandatory to issue the report for the year ended June 30, 2009 as per new format?

Regards

Ahmed
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I will recommend that post the link here.

Regards,

Awais Aftab

- Star - 10-15-2009

Dear

Here is link;

http//www.icap.org.pk/userfiles/file/TechnicalDepart/Circular_No_9.pdf

Regards,

*

- wsafca - 10-16-2009

Thank Star to post the link

Can now any body please help.

- kamranACA - 10-16-2009

Dear

This amendment is effective from the date of the circular and has no compulsory linkage with 30 June 2009.

The reports for 30 June 2009 that will be issued / signed by auditors after the date of issuance of the said circular will include the para regarding related period transactions.

The reports issued before the date of issuance of the circular will not include such paragraph.

Please note the reference of stock exchange regulation given in the format of ICAP is wrong and has to be amended in the light of revision of such regulations. There is another mistake as well.

I hope it is clarified.

Regards,

Kamran.

- kamranACA - 10-16-2009

*** related party transactions.

- wsafca - 10-17-2009

and now what if Someone has issued report and didnt included that paragraph?

- wsafca - 10-17-2009

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by kamranACA
 Dear

Please note the reference of stock exchange regulation given in the format of ICAP is wrong and has to be amended in the light of revision of such regulations. There is another mistake as well.

Regards,

Kamran.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I didn't understood the above para

- kamranACA - 10-17-2009

Dear

I thought you would have noticed the mistake so I didn't go in detail.

The revised report format refers (in newly added paragraph) to a stock exchange regulation (regulation 37 etc). This reference has to be amended since the correct reference is 35. (I don't remember complete reference but it is sub part of regulation 35).

The reports recently issued by firms have been issued after correcting it.

Further to above, a portion of another paragraph has also been changed in the revised report format but (unlike other changes) has not been underlined to depict such change. Due to this some firms did not notice this other amendment while issuing their report(s).

You must compare previous and revised report formats/versions to figure out what I have mentioned.

As far as your question is concerned, I am not in a position to give any conclusive remarks on the situation. Some partner should seek advice for a course of action. However, I, as a hint, can say that a revised report may be issued "clearly stating "REVISED" and be circulated to members/shareholders before AGM along with printed annual report along with a clarification memo from management. This matter should be discussed at AGM as well to apprise the members. The revised report should also be submitted by client to stock exchanges and SECP with a clarification note.

This can resolve the issue to a greater extent but needs the willingness and support from client and strength from partners to face criticism. However, it will be safest than hiding this fact and facing grave consequences afterwards.

For doing so AGM must have not been held so far. If it has gone, things would be real complex. Then DUA will serve the purpose Inshallah.

However, your partners must discuss it in detail and get suitable advice before taking a course.

Regards,

Kamran.

- wsafca - 10-20-2009

Thanks

I have to ask 'DUA', i guess