Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Auditing the auditors: A comparative study about India, UK, and the USA
Vani Ramesh a, Ramanathan b
a
Bharathiar University, Coimbatore, TN, India
b
St. Claret College, Bangalore, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Contextual status quo of The National Financial Reporting Authority (NFRA) in India as a self-governing
Received 30 July 2020 controller to audit the auditors has rehabilitated an argument on ‘‘peer review” and ‘‘independent
Accepted 8 August 2020 review”. Whereas the global exercise is that of self-governing misunderstanding above the auditors,
Available online xxxx
the professional body of auditors in India, The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) is diver-
gent to the move of the government to employ a regulator over auditors. This paper scrutinizes the audit
Keywords: procedures and audit format followed by India, the UK, and the USA. The professional courses that are
Auditing
offered to tune the auditor’s professional skills, qualities, and knowledge, such as, CA, CPA, and ACCA fol-
Skills
Qualities
lowed by these countries are reviewed. Financial statements reviewed by a self-regulating auditor and
NFRA following the auditing principles stimulate self-assurance. The study treasures that all participants plus
ICAI committed public accountants trust that the present state-run of auditing is not acceptable in India as
parallel to the UK and USA. For the study, the data is collected from audit professionals, financial experts,
academicians, and stakeholders by the aid of a well-structured questionnaire (5-point Likert scale). Factor
Analysis (FA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) along with Inferential Analysis is calculated. In con-
clusion, the path diagram is drawn with the help of Structural Equation Modelling. The discussions high-
light that to elevate a country like India, adapting stringent rules and regulations is necessary to ensure
that profession of an audit always serves towards a good impact in terms of factors such as auditor’s fees,
auditors’ size, and auditors’ reputation. The findings and suggestions may be useful for policymakers, aca-
demicians, and stakeholders.
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Confer-
ence on Newer Trends and Innovation in Mechanical Engineering: Materials Science.

1. Introduction straight impact on the audit quality and the company’s perfor-
mance [16].
Indian Auditing remains a deep-rooted exercise and assures NFRAI, as a self-governing controller to ‘Audit the Auditors’.
the excellence and stability of audit service. In India, ISO 9001 ‘‘Peer review” and Independent review” are some of the pointers
is the quality framework that assures the quality of any busi- that are taken momentum in India, though the ICAI is contrasting
ness. Quality audit is the technique of orderly inspection of a against the interchange of the government to employ a supervisor
quality agenda performed by an external or internal quality above auditors. The same may be the case in most of the countries
auditor or an auditing crew. This helps the firm in deciding across the globe. Countries like India, UK, and the USA have taken
whether the firm justifies the set quality framework. As audits some precautions, though, for regulating audit services. These reg-
are an elementary directive maneuver to be practical in ulatory bodies keep track of the services to maintain quality audits.
validating objective evidence of firms’ processes. Auditors play ‘The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ (AICPA),
a major role in stabilizing the quality in the company by orderly, which is established during 1988, has made it mandatory for the
periodical audits. Reviewing these audit services will engrain and public accounting firms a periodic quality noble assessment [1].
pledge the audit quality and goodwill in the market The Quality Review Board (QRB), The International Auditing and
(Francis, 2004). It is proved by many researchers and financial Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), and Enhancing Audit Quality
experts, the goodwill of the firm takes a very important and (EAQ), Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) are

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.304
2214-7853/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Newer Trends and Innovation in Mechanical Engineering:
Materials Science.

Please cite this article as: V. Ramesh and Ramanathan, Auditing the auditors: A comparative study about India, UK, and the USA, Materials Today: Proceed-
ings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.304
V. Ramesh, Ramanathan Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

some of the regulatory bodies acting stringently in monitoring the 3. Literature review
audit quality.
PCAOB is in the directions of the Securities and Exchange Com- Based on study objectives, suitable citations are considered and
mission (SEC), a non-profit entity, and has its set standards to mon- referred to as a literature survey. As mentioned earlier, in India,
itor and enact against delinquent auditors. PCAOB generates there is an only independent regulatory body to direct the auditors,
revenue from public companies and dealers professionals fees but no independent reviewers or peer reviewer’s policy. US has an
and been very active in executing the audit. PCAOB has its set stan- effective peer review and independent review mechanism and has
dards, rules, and periodical regular inspections for the registered been examined by Alam et al. [1] in his study on observation of
public accounting firms. PCAOB commands right over wayward audit firms, audit clients, financial analysts, and bankers to assess
auditors, even to the amount of castigating them. The UK has an the efficiency of the noble evaluation program of AICPA (SECPS sec-
independent body, Financial Reporting Council (FRC) who regu- tion of AICPA). According to this research, the discernment of all
lates and promotes superior ‘corporate governance‘ and ‘reporting‘. the four integral sets on the primary objective of the viscount eval-
FRC has its set encryptions and ethics for good supremacy, uation program as refining audit practices and no important vari-
Accounting, and Auditing practices; analyses reports of public enti- ances in the perception of groups on the key aim of the peer review
ties; and has the control over misconduct to scrutinize. FRC is program. The peer-review tool was perceived as insufficient for
funded by the audit professionals who are obligatory to subsidize decreasing audit catastrophes and spotting audit deception in
further down to the provisions of Companies Act of 2006. Also, financial reports. According to Ehlen and Welker [5], the percep-
FRC is established up under the Australian Securities and Invest- tion of the impartiality of actions implemented by AICPA in its peer
ments Commission Act (ASICA) 2000, supervises the efficiency assessment database is acknowledged. As of 2018, ICAI empowered
and effective performance of the financial reporting structure, more powers and become more active in monitoring audit quality.
and offers tactical guidance about the quality of audits conducted To mention a few of them, are, Amarapalli group of companies
by the auditors in Australia. (Oct, 26th, 2018), Sathyam fraud. During January 2018, SEBI
ICAI has recognized the PRB and QRB in India to demeanor enforced a 2-year bar on the audit firms of PwC affiliated firms
assessments on audit services. but doesn’t have powers to punish or penalize the audit firms.
As of 2002, ICAI has laid the foundation in India, to ensure qual- The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 2002 hosted modifications in the US to
ity audit services. The main objective being educative, is to assure improve audit excellence and recognized PCAOB which substituted
quality audit services through professional and ethical standards, self-regulation. Many studies on audit quality investigated earlier.
then going with the disciplinary mechanism. The Peer Review Hilary and Lennox [9] inspected the trustworthiness of the peer
Board in India has an incomplete consequence as compared to review program in the US and resisted that not by perpendicular
other counties, like, US. The Peer Review Board in India organizes inadequacies of peer-review, clients remark the review reports as
training programs imparting training to the reviewers. Whereas, being enlightening indications of audit firm quality. The outcomes
the US has a peer review program by the SEC Practice Sec- of the study by DeFond and Lennox [4,15] jagged out that the dan-
tion (SECPS) of AICPA had remained relatively operative in the per- ger of PCAOB reviews for insignificant companies obliged practi-
iod of 20 years (1977 to 1997). SECPS directed 4021 noble cally partial of all such firms to leave the audit services.
evaluations and 769 remedial movements were levied by the P Ragothaman [13,18] in her study linked the peer assessments
RC [1]. and reviews by PCAOB assessments and resolved autonomous
QRB is a more authoritative peer-review body in India, though inspections as harder and rigorous. Houston and Stefaniak [6,10]
doesn’t have disciplinary or investigative influence above the audi- investigated the perception of partners from huge and by the year
tors. QRB comprises parts of the followers designated by the gov- reviewed audit firms. Gipper et al. [8] scrutinized the investor’s
ernment and others by the ICAI. The first QRB was established in valuation of reporting trustworthiness as a significance of audit
2007 and then in 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015, and 2016. As per statis- examinations by PCAOB. It brings into a life that audit lapse by a
tics (2012–15) (QRB, 2015), QRB reviewed 216 statutory audit self-governing regulator upsurges the credibility of financial
assignments. 74 advisories were delivered to audit firms as review reporting.
moan to advance the audit quality service. The Indian Companies
Act, 2013 [Section 132 (2)] has established NFRA, under the
4. Methodology
Government of India, a self-governing review form to improve
the audit superiority. NFRA makes necessary endorsements to
The study applied a drop-off survey to collect the data from the
the government on the design of Accounting and Auditing strate-
finance and associated professionals, including auditors, financial
gies. The main function of NFRA is to ensure the quality of audit
consultants, bookkeepers, chartered accountants, academicians
services under the set standards, and if needed to suggest neces-
(involved in teaching and research in accounting and associated
sary measures to improve the quality.
fields); participants from diverse fields like promoters, investors,
commercial administrators, proprietors of SMEs and stockholders
of public companies. The sample size is 400 respondents. First
2. Objectives of the study
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) with Principal Component Anal-
ysis (PCA) Varimax rotation was performed to classify the essential
 To understand the audit quality and audit procedures followed
factors that were persuading the retorts of various groups in the
by the Indian Auditors, Auditors in the USA, and the UK.
study. Finally, the SEM path is drawn.
 To compare the audit quality and audit procedures followed by
India, the USA, and the UK.
 To provide necessary suggestions to improve audit quality, 5. Analysis and discussion
especially about Indian auditors.
KMO Bartlett s test was done and the date found adequate and
Based on the above objectives, the present study aimed at going significant to go ahead with the Factor Analysis (FA). Table 1 shows
extensive literature review and also tested empirically with the the test results for KMO Bartlett’s.
help of a well-structured questionnaire distributed (drop-off sur- The results show that the data is suitable for the study
vey) among the financial experts, auditors and corporates. (KMO = 0.716). Bartlett‘s test is very substantial governing out
2
V. Ramesh, Ramanathan Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 1 accountants do not trust that there is a requirement of having an

KMO and Bartlett’s Test. autonomous supervisory body as they are sturdy of the belief that
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0.716 QRB and PRB can be made additional operative to increase the
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 529.813 audit eminence. They have anxiety from the independent regulator
df 35 [21]. The outcome for the same in this study is documented by the
Sig. 0.000
Chi-square Test. The Chi-square Test results (c2 (6)>=23.719,
Source: Authors Computation. p = 0.001) discloses a solid connotation amongst the occupation
of the respondents and their answers (Table 4). The null hypothesis
any risk of the relationship matrix being a self matrix. Also, the that there is no connotation among the reaction of the respondent
results indicate the suitability of data and sufficiency for further is excluded at a 1% significance level (Table 4). Whereas academi-
factor and confirmatory factor analysis. Further, factor analysis is cians and other people think there is a solid requirement for an
done with the help of PCA. Eigenvalues are more than 1 (rotating autonomous confusion body, the working CAs have a diverse belief
orthogonally using varimax rotation). Most of the variables are [20].
having greater than 0.5 commonalities with extracted factors. This agrees with the outcomes of Houston and Stefaniak [10]
There is only 3 variable found closer to 0.5, which is the benchmark which conveyed the anxiety of the mainstream of associates of
range. These variables are also taken into consideration for further audit firms on the quality of the PCAOB examinations. The cross-
analysis. Cronbach’s Alpha is added to examine inner reliability wise contradictory perception of supplementary clusters of the
and found satisfactory (0.6) for further investigation (Table 2). study is not dissimilar as initiated by Robertson and Houston
Five factors explained approximately 58% variation. Considering [14]. After it was queried ‘‘Do you think that the current self-
Cronbach‘s Alpha being supporting for further analysis, decided to regulation by PRB or QRB over auditors is effective?” the outcomes
proceed with further analysis. Though most of the factors are sup- remained identical.
porting the audit quality in all the countries, still there is strong The null hypothesis that the answer is self-governing of the
support to go with peer review. The factor loadings and compo- respondent’s profession is excluded at a 1% significance level by
nents are explained in Table 3 (Rotated Component Matrix). the chi-square test (c2 (6)>=25.697, p = 0.000). Whereas academi-
Yet, accountants trust that self-regulation above the auditors cians have a robust trust that the present self-regulation by PRB
over the current PRB or QRB might be completed additional oper- or QRB is unproductive, the accountants reflect it exact operative.
ative as is practicality accomplished above the years by the ICAI. But, here is a huge quantity of active accountants as thriving
The academicians tangled in teaching and research of accounting who reflect the ineptness of identity. Proceeding the subject of cor-
and related arenas and others on behalf of the entire public do rectness among self-regulation and independent regulation the
not support this state of action. The overall perception of the peo- chartered accountants still incline self-regulation. The chi-square
ple that auditors are accountable for gaps and scams in commercial test (c2 (3)>=7.289, p = 0.063) is significant at a 10% significance
reports of companies in auditing is replicated by the outcomes of level demonstrating the point that diverse professions devour
the study. The impeachment of the auditors in the current cases diverse views around self-regulation against the independent rule.
of accounting scams, remarkable of them actually PNB swoop Table 4 directs that while CAs and CA students supporter strap-
(For e.g.: deviation of moneys by Amarapalli group of companies, pingly for self-regulation, academicians and other professionals
the predicament in the debt-laden IL&FS) have furthermost possi- sustenance the machinery of independent instruction and the sit-
ble made the opinion of the people which record hired accountants uation up of NFRA.
do not favour with (Figs. 1 and 2). This research on the likely streaks proposes that modifications
Diverse queries were questioned for additional examination as are among groups of participants on the perception of self-
to whether the respondents fitting to diverse demography have regulation and independent regulation above the auditors [19].
an unlike belief on numerous characteristics. For example, the The chartered accountants and the professional body of chartered
working chartered accountants might have a dissimilar view on accountants (ICAI) are contradictory to the establishment of NFRA.
whether there is a necessity to have a self-governing omission The ICAI has expressed its displeasure with the expansion of NFRA
body i.e. NFRA over the auditor’s vis a vis additional respondents fearing that its part will deteriorate provocatively by a supervisory
in the study. By way of each noted outcomes, the chartered body afar them. In a memorandum to the Ministry of Corporate

Table 2
Total variance explained.

Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 3.286 21.905 21.905 3.286 21.905 21.905 2.403 16.023 16.023
2 1.866 12.442 34.347 1.866 12.442 34.347 2.069 13.791 29.814
3 1.500 10.002 44.350 1.500 10.002 44.350 1.514 10.092 39.906
4 1.021 6.804 51.153 1.021 6.804 51.153 1.495 9.966 49.873
5 1.002 6.680 57.833 1.002 6.680 57.833 1.194 7.961 57.833
6 0.866 5.772 63.606
7 0.827 5.515 69.121
8 0.780 5.199 74.319
9 0.690 4.601 78.921
10 0.643 4.287 83.207
11 0.587 3.911 87.118
12 0.570 3.798 90.916
13 0.549 3.662 94.578
14 0.433 2.884 97.462
15 0.381 2.538 100.000

Extraction: Principal Component Method.

3
V. Ramesh, Ramanathan Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 3
Rotated Component matrix.

Component
1 2 3
1 Auditor’s quality is very much needed to avoid financial frauds. 0.618
2 To improve Auditors quality, there is a necessity for peer review. 0.575
3 Peer review should be legal and mandatory for Indian Auditing firms. 0.731
4 PRB and QRB self-regulation are very effective. 0.557
5 Self-regulation over auditors can be made more effective by strengthening the existing PRB or QRB setup? 0.648
6 NFRA will be able to ensure acquiescence over the auditors. 0.566
7 NFRA Do you think that NFRA will be able to ensure compliance of accounting and auditing standards? 0.639
8 The current self-regulation by PRB or QRB over auditors is effective. 0.621
9 NFRA will be in a position to investigate audit firms. 0.609
10 Self-regulation over auditors can be made more effective by strengthening PRB or QRB setup. 0.531
11 NFRA will emerge as a professional body to guide formulation of accounting, auditing policies/standards. 0.534
12 Indian financial system is very much suitable for improving audit quality 0.502
13 NFRA is effective in preventing the accounting fraud. 0.570
14 There is a need to have inclusive teaching pedagogy for the auditing subjects in academics. 0.643
15 0.549

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

Fig. 1. Correlation among the variables tested.

Affairs, the Government of India it has enumerated a remonstra- passionate disagreement of public accountants to established
tion for elimination from directions foundation of NFRA [2]. The active an independent supervisor is redirected in their accomplish-

4
V. Ramesh, Ramanathan Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 2. Audit quality, Audit procedure and Company performance.

Table 4
Measurement Model Fit Indicates for First output Modified CFA.

Absolute fit indicators Incremental fit indicators

Model Fit Index Chi-Square df p-value CMIN/Df RMSEA CFI GFI AGFI NFI TLI Dv 2
(v2) of v2 (v2/df)
Acceptable value Small <0.05 <is 5 <0.05 is good,<0.08 >is 0.95 great, Same Same >is 0.90 >is 0.95
is acceptable >is 0.7 tolerable great, >is great, >is
0.7 0.7
tolerable tolerable
First Output 941.2 383 0 2.47 0.073 0.881 0.81 0.77 0.817 0.865
Modified 1392.201 275 0.00 2.17 0.087 0.579 0.747 0.747 0.529 0.541 117.9

Source: Primary data collected from questionnaire.

Source: Authors Computation.

5
V. Ramesh, Ramanathan Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

ment as well. Northern India CA Federation (NICAF), an NGO on business-standard.com/article/finance/icai-expresses-disappointment-with-

centre -over-dismissive-stance-on-nfra-118101800860_1.html.
behalf of the CA community of Northern India, marched an appeal
[3] Q.R. Board. Report on Audit Quality review (2017).
to the Delhi High Court stimulating controls of NFRA and knocking [4] Mark L. DeFond, Clive S. Lennox, The effect of SOX on small auditor exits and
an irrational limit on the precise to self-determination of the pro- audit quality, J. Accounting Economics 52 (1) (2011) 21–40.
fession of the CAs [17]. [5] C. Ehlen, R. Welker, Procedural Fairness in the Peer and Quality Review
Programs, Auditing: A J. Practice Theory, 15 (1) (1996) 38–52.
The outcomes care the policy interference of the government [6] Financial Express, No intentional wrongdoing in Satyam Fraud, says PW: MCA
constructed on the belief that self-regulation has not assisted the to examine SEBI order (2018). Retrieved January 12, 2018, from http://
anticipated resolution and similarly that the global exercise is to epaper.financialexpress.com/1502102/Pune/January-12,-2018#page/5/2
[7] A. Gambier, Enhancing audit quality in the public interest: a focus on
have a commanding independent authority to audit the public professional scepticism, quality control and group audits, 44 (2016) 1–26.
audit firms [7]. During 2012, the Indian financial system has real- [8] B. Gipper, C. Leuz, M. Maffett, Public Audit Oversight and Reporting Credibility:
ized the need for quasi-regulatory body and established the Parlia- Evidence from the PCAOB Inspection Regime. European Corporate Governance
Institute (ECGI) - Finance Working Paper No. 453/2015, Chicago Booth
mentary Standing Committee on Finance. The Companies Act, 2013 Research Paper No. 15-40 (2015).
has made a facility for establishing the National Financial Report- [9] Gilles Hilary, Clive Lennox, The credibility of self-regulation: Evidence from the
ing Authority (NFRA). Later, many requirements of the Companies accounting profession’s peer review program, J. Accounting Economics 40 (1-
3) (2005) 211–229.
Act, 2013 emanated into action with effect from April 1, 2014, but [10] R.W. Houston, C.M. Stefaniak, Audit partner perceptions of post-audit review
NFRA remained un-notified. On March 1st, 2018, with the PNB mechanisms: An Examination of Internal Quality Reviews and PCAOB
fraud of $ 3 billion, NFRA gained its momentum in regulating the inspections. Accounting Horizons, 27 (1) (2013) 23–49.
[11] International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, Audit quality – a
overnighted public listed companies.
perpetual current issue, (2019) 1–8.
[12] P. Review, Enhancing Audit Quality : See the profession’s 2017 progress, 2018–
6. Conclusion, suggestions and policy implications of the study 2019 (2019).
[13] S. Ragothaman, Watching the watchdogs: an examination of the PCAOB
quality control inspection reports on triennially inspected audit firms and the
The study understands that the finance department must try to AICPA peer review reports. Presented at the 2012 Deloitte Foundation
identify the requirements of the stakeholders and believe that the University of Kansas Auditing Symposium (2012). Retrieved from web.ku.
edu/audsymp/.../Watching%20the%20WatchdogsRagothamanApril2012.pdf
current state of auditing is not satisfactory in India [3]. The audi- [14] J.C. Robertson, R.W. Houston, Investors expectations of the improvement in
tors cannot afford unseeing sense to the public perception empha- the credibility of audit opinions following PCAOB inspection reports with
sized by the impeachment of auditors (e.g.: Satyam Computers; identified deficiencies, Accounting Public Interest, 10 (2010) 36–56.
[15] SEBI, Report of the Committee on Corporate Governance (2017). Retrieved
Vijaya Mallya) [11,12]. The specialized accountants must grasp
from https://www.sebi.gov.in/reports/reports/oct-2017/report-of-the-
the awareness of the community and that of the regulators and committee-on-corporate-gover nance_36177.html
how this perception is different from their self-interest. The study [16] A. Santoso, R. Widyaswati, The Effect of Earnings Management on Company’s
Performance with Audit Quality and Company’s Size as Moderating Variables,
is reliable with the opinion of the ICAI in contradiction of the for-
18 (2) (2017) 97–106.
mation of NFRA as there is metamorphosis in the opinion of the [17] Tax Scan, Delhi HC stays Proceedings by NFRA: Send Notice to Govt on Petition
respondents on the setting up of the independent authority, NFRA by Chartered Accountants Body (2018). Retrieved October 11, 2018, from
to audit the auditors. Whereas the chartered accountants in India http://www.taxscan.in/delhi-hc-stays-proceedings-nfra-send-notice-govt-
petition-chartered-ac countants-body/29508/
trust that self-regulation over the auditors over the present PRB [18] The Hindu Business Line, CAs as fiduciaries: ICAI opposes SEBI move (2018).
or QRB may be made extra operative as similar to ICAI. Being the Retrieved September 4, 2018, from https://www.
first and foremost, the present study, considered only limited thehindubusinessline.com/markets/cas-as-market-fiduciaries-icai-opposes-
sebi- move/article24865919.ece
respondents as a sample. Further study may extend on the testing [19] R. Venkataraman, J.P. Weber, M. Willenborg, M. Willenborg, Litigation Risk,
different variables with more number of respondents. The findings Audit Quality, and Audit Fees : Evidence from Initial Public Offerings, 83 (5)
of this study may provide some guidelines to boost the audit qual- (2019) 1315–1345, doi: 10.2308/accr.2008.83.5.1315.
[20] L. Wang, (2015). The Research of Initial Public Offering Audit Risk
ity in India. Management, (October), 471–475
[21] T. Yue, A. Winton, X. Yu, T.Y.U.E. Wang, A. Winton, X. Yu, American Finance
Declaration of Competing Interest Association Corporate Fraud and Business Conditions : Evidence from IPOs
Source : The Journal of Finance, Wiley for the American Finance Association
Stable, 65 (6) (2019) 2255–2292, URL : https://www.jstor.org/stable/
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan- 23324410.
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper. Further Reading

References [1] Accountants, A. I. of C. P. Strengthening Organizations, dvancing Economies

(2019), 1–7.
[2] A. Aghaei, Review of studies on audit quality, 20 (2011) 312–317.
[1] P. Alam, R.C. Hoffman, H.M. Heidi, Perceptions of the peer review program of
[3] N. Sun, EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON IPO, (2017), 39–51.
the accounting profession: implications for management, J. Managerial Issues
[4] New York. AICPA Reports on Actions Promoting Enhanced Audit Quality,
12 (4) (2000) 408–442.
(2019), 1–2.
[2] Business Standard, ICAI expresses disappointment with Centre over dismissive
stance on NFRA (2018). Retrieved October 19, 2018, from https://www.