Launch offer — 25% off with code LAUNCH-25 See plans →
Microlesson · 5-min read

Recurring Audit and Change in Terms of Engagement (SA 210)

## Recurring Audit and Change in Terms of Engagement

### Recurring Audit – Do You Send EL Every Year?

In a recurring audit (continuous audit by the same auditor), the auditor may not send an engagement letter every year.

However, the auditor should revise or remind the client of existing terms in the following circumstances:

TriggerExample
Change in senior managementNew CFO/CEO appointed
Significant change in ownershipPromoter sells majority stake
Significant change in nature or size of operationsCompany diversifies or expands significantly
Change in legal or regulatory requirementsNew Companies Act provision applies
Change in FRFShift from IGAAP to Ind AS
Indication that client has misunderstood objective/scope of auditClient thinks auditor will detect all frauds
Any revised or special terms of engagementFee restructuring, new reporting requirements

> SA 510 reference: Initial audit engagements involve opening balances where another auditor performed the prior-year audit.

---

### Acceptance of Change in Terms of Audit Engagement

Sometimes the client requests a downgrade from audit to a lower-assurance engagement (e.g., review). The auditor must evaluate whether a reasonable justification exists.

#### Three Cases

Case (A) – Change in circumstances:

Client's circumstances have changed, affecting the need for the original level of service.

→ Auditor may consider accepting the change.

Case (B) – Misunderstanding:

Client misunderstood the nature of the audit as originally requested.

→ Auditor may consider accepting the change.

Case (C) – Restriction on scope:

Management or other circumstances restrict the scope of audit engagement.

→ Auditor must particularly consider the implications of the restriction on scope.

→ If restriction would lead to a Qualified or Disclaimer opinion, a request to change to Review may be the client's attempt to escape that opinion – this is NOT a reasonable justification.

#### Key Rule on 'Not Reasonable'

A change is not considered reasonable if it appears the change relates to information that is:

  • Inaccurate, or
  • Not satisfactory

Classic Example:

Auditor is unable to obtain SAAE (Sufficient Appropriate Audit Evidence) about debtors → likely Qualified/Disclaimer opinion → Management requests change from Audit to Review to avoid this → Auditor should NOT accept this request.

---

### Steps Before Agreeing to Change

1. Determine whether reasonable justification exists

2. Assess any legal or contractual implications of the change

3. If justification exists → change may be accepted

4. Issue revised engagement letter (new EL)

5. Old work, if relevant, can be used under the revised engagement

---

### Non-Agreement to Change in Terms

If management does not permit the auditor to continue the original audit engagement:

Auditor shall:

a) Withdraw from the audit engagement

b) Determine whether there is any obligation to report to other parties such as:

  • Owners
  • Regulators

---

### Report on Related Services – Important Distinction

When shifting from Audit to a Related Service (e.g., Agreed-Upon Procedures or Review):

  • The report on related services should NOT include reference to:
  • Original audit procedures
  • Any procedure performed in the original audit engagement
  • EXCEPTION: When shift is from Audit to Agreed-Upon Procedures → reference to procedures performed is a normal part of such a report.

Worked example

### Example 1

Recurring audit example: Rajuk & Co. has been auditing Rajuk Co. for FY 24-25 and FY 25-26 continuously. They need NOT send a fresh engagement letter every year. However, if in FY 26-27 the company acquires a subsidiary (significant change in size/operations), Rajuk & Co. should revise/remind existing terms via a fresh or updated engagement letter.

### Example 2

Change of terms – Case (C): During audit of a manufacturing company, the auditor cannot verify closing stock (restriction on scope by management). The auditor was heading towards a Qualified opinion. Management then requests a change from Audit to Review. This is NOT a reasonable justification – the auditor should not accept. The correct action is to express a Qualified opinion or withdraw.

### Example 3

Change of terms – Case (A): A startup originally engaged an auditor for statutory audit, but then became exempt from audit under the Companies Act due to reduced turnover. This is a genuine change in circumstances – Case (A) applies and the auditor may consider accepting the change.

⚠️ Common exam mistakes

  • Thinking the auditor must always send a fresh engagement letter in recurring audits – it is discretionary, triggered only by specific circumstances.
  • Confusing Case (A)/(B) with Case (C): in Cases A and B the auditor 'may consider' the change; in Case C the auditor must 'particularly consider implications of restriction on scope' – a higher threshold.
  • Forgetting that when a shift occurs from Audit to Related Services, the new report must NOT reference old audit procedures (except in Audit → Agreed-Upon Procedures shift).
  • Missing the withdrawal + reporting obligation when non-agreement occurs – both steps are mandatory, not just withdrawal.
  • Stating that a change is acceptable just because the client requests it – the auditor must find reasonable justification independently.
Bare-Act text Para 14–16 · SA 210 – Agreeing the Terms of Audit Engagements (ICAI) · click to expand
If the auditor is unable to agree to a change in the terms of the audit engagement and is not permitted by management to continue the original audit engagement, the auditor shall withdraw from the audit engagement where possible under applicable law or regulation, and determine whether there is any obligation to report the circumstances to those charged with governance, owners, or regulators.
Now that you've read this — what's next?
Move from understanding → mastery in 3 clicks. Each option below picks up from this lesson's topic.
Start 15-min diagnostic