CA
Tax Tutor
A

When Rajesh & Co. Pvt. Ltd. has 12,000 purchase invoices in a year, no auditor can realistically verify every single one. That's where audit sampling comes in — it lets the auditor test a representative subset of items and draw a conclusion about the entire population. SA 530 is the standard that governs how this sampling must be done properly.

Audit sampling means applying audit procedures to less than 100% of items in a population, where every sampling unit has a chance of being selected, so the auditor can form a conclusion about the whole population. This is a 4-mark concept frequently tested — examiners love asking you to distinguish between sampling and non-sampling approaches.

There are two broad types: Statistical sampling uses random selection + probability theory to evaluate results (so you can mathematically quantify sampling risk), while Non-statistical sampling relies on the auditor's judgement — both are acceptable under SA 530, but the auditor must still use judgement sensibly. The key risks to remember: Sampling risk is the risk that the auditor's conclusion from the sample differs from the conclusion if the entire population were tested. Non-sampling risk arises from human error — wrong procedure, misinterpreting evidence — and has nothing to do with sample size.

For sample design, three things matter: purpose of the procedure, characteristics of the population, and sample size. A larger sample reduces sampling risk but increases cost — the auditor must balance both. When evaluating results, if a deviation or misstatement is found, the auditor first checks whether it's an anomaly (a one-off error that cannot recur) — if it is, it can be excluded from projecting error to the population, but the anomaly itself must still be addressed. If the projected misstatement exceeds tolerable misstatement, the auditor must take further action — extend the sample, perform alternative procedures, or modify the audit opinion. Remember: tolerable misstatement is set below materiality to allow for the possibility that multiple errors exist.

📊 Worked example

Example 1 — Evaluating Sample Results (Tests of Details)

Ms. Iyer, the auditor of Bharat Traders Ltd., is testing trade receivables totalling ₹80,00,000 (80 lakhs). She sets tolerable misstatement at ₹2,00,000 and selects a sample of 50 invoices from a population of 500.

On testing, she finds misstatements in 4 invoices:

  • Invoice A: ₹8,000 overstatement
  • Invoice B: ₹12,000 overstatement
  • Invoice C: ₹5,000 understatement
  • Invoice D: ₹6,000 — confirmed as an anomaly (data entry error, already corrected)

Working:

Step 1 — Exclude the anomaly (Invoice D) from projection.

Step 2 — Total misstatement in sample (excluding anomaly) = ₹8,000 + ₹12,000 − ₹5,000 = ₹15,000 (net overstatement)

Step 3 — Project to population:

Projected misstatement = (₹15,000 ÷ 50) × 500 = ₹1,50,000

Step 4 — Add anomaly back for total likely misstatement:

Total = ₹1,50,000 + ₹6,000 = ₹1,56,000

Step 5 — Compare with tolerable misstatement:

₹1,56,000 < ₹2,00,000 ✓

Conclusion: The projected misstatement is within tolerable limits. Ms. Iyer can conclude that the population is not materially misstated — but she must still request management correct the known errors.

---

Example 2 — Sampling Risk Scenario (MCQ-style)

Mr. Sharma tests a sample of 60 expense vouchers from 600. He concludes controls are effective. However, if he had tested all 600, he would have found the controls were actually not effective.

This gap between his sample conclusion and the true population conclusion = Sampling Risk (specifically, risk of incorrect acceptance for tests of controls).

Answer: Sampling Risk — the sample was unrepresentative by chance, not due to any procedural error by Mr. Sharma.

⚠️ Common exam mistakes

  • Students confuse sampling risk with non-sampling risk. Sampling risk is purely statistical — it exists because you tested a subset. Non-sampling risk is human error (wrong procedure, missed misstatement while reviewing). They are completely separate concepts.
  • Don't say 'any selection method is audit sampling.' If the auditor selects only high-value items or items above a threshold (100% of items over ₹5 lakhs), that is NOT audit sampling — not every unit had a chance of selection. This is a common trap in MCQs.
  • Students forget to project misstatements to the population. Finding ₹15,000 of errors in your sample doesn't mean only ₹15,000 is wrong in the full population — you must scale it up proportionately.
  • Anomalies are not ignored — they are excluded from projection only. Don't write 'the auditor ignores the anomaly.' The anomaly must still be separately evaluated and communicated. Examiners specifically look for this distinction.
  • Confusing 'tolerable misstatement' with 'materiality.' Tolerable misstatement is always set lower than overall materiality, to leave a buffer for uncorrected errors from other areas. Never set them equal in your answers.
📖 Reference: SA 530 — Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Test yourself
Practice questions on this section, AI-graded with citations.
⚡ Practice now →